The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 The First Millennium Revisionist Archive
How Fake Is Roman Antiquity?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

This is the first of a series of three articles challenging the conventional historical framework of the Mediterranean world from the Roman Empire to the Crusades. It is a collective contribution to an old debate that has gained new momentum in recent decades in the fringe of the academic world, mostly in Germany, Russia, and France. Some working hypotheses will be made along the way, and the final article will suggest a global solution in the form of a paradigm shift based on hard archeological evidence.

Tacitus and Bracciolini

One of our most detailed historical sources on imperial Rome is Cornelius Tacitus (56-120 CE), whose major works, the Annals and the Histories, span the history of the Roman Empire from the death of Augustus in 14 AD, to the death of Domitian in 96.

Here is how the French scholar Polydor Hochart introduced in 1890 the result of his investigation on “the authenticity of the Annals and the Histories of Tacitus,” building up on the work of John Wilson Ross published twelve years earlier, Tacitus and Bracciolini: The Annals forged in the XVth century (1878):

“At the beginning of the fifteenth century scholars had at their disposal no part of the works of Tacitus; they were supposed to be lost. It was around 1429 that Poggio Bracciolini and Niccoli of Florence brought to light a manuscript that contained the last six books of the Annals and the first five books of the Histories. It is this archetypal manuscript that served to make the copies that were in circulation until the use of printing. Now, when one wants to know where and how it came into their possession, one is surprised to find that they have given unacceptable explanations on this subject, that they either did not want or could not say the truth. About eighty years later, Pope Leo X was given a volume containing the first five books of the Annals. Its origin is also surrounded by darkness. / Why these mysteries? What confidence do those who exhibited these documents deserve? What guarantees do we have of their authenticity? / In considering these questions we shall first see that Poggio and Niccoli were not distinguished by honesty and loyalty, and that the search for ancient manuscripts was for them an industry, a means of acquiring money. / We will also notice that Poggio was one of the most learned men of his time, that he was also a clever calligrapher, and that he even had in his pay scribes trained by him to write on parchment in a remarkable way in Lombard and Carolin characters. Volumes coming out of his hands could thus imitate perfectly the ancient manuscripts, as he says himself. / We will also be able to see with what elements the Annals and the Histories were composed. Finally, in seeking who may have been the author of this literary fraud, we shall be led to think that, in all probability, the pseudo-Tacitus is none other than Poggio Bracciolini himself.”[1]Polydor Hochart, De l’authenticité des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite, 1890 (on archive.org), pp. viii-ix.

Hochart’s demonstration proceeds in two stages. First, he traces the origin of the manuscript discovered by Poggio and Niccoli, using Poggio’s correspondence as evidence of deception. Then Hochart deals with the emergence of the second manuscript, two years after Pope Leo X (a Medici) had promised great reward in gold to anyone who could provide him with unknown manuscripts of the ancient Greeks or Romans. Leo rewarded his unknown provider with 500 golden crowns, a fortune at that time, and immediately ordered the printing of the precious manuscript. Hochart concludes that the manuscript must have been supplied indirectly to Leo X by Jean-François Bracciolini, the son and sole inheritor of Poggio’s private library and papers, who happened to be secretary of Leo X at that time, and who used an anonymous intermediary in order to elude suspicion.

Both manuscripts are now preserved in Florence, so their age can be scientifically established, can’t it? That is questionable, but the truth, anyway, is that their age is simply assumed. For other works of Tacitus, such as Germania and De Agricola, we don’t even have any medieval manuscripts. David Schaps tells us that Germania was ignored throughout the Middle Ages but survived in a single manuscript that was found in Hersfeld Abbey in 1425, was brought to Italy and examined by Enea Silvio Piccolomini, later Pope Pius II, as well as by Bracciolini, then vanished from sight.[2]David Schaps, “The Found and Lost Manuscripts of Tacitus’ De Agricola,” Classical Philology, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan., 1979), pp. 28-42, on www.jstor.org.

Poggio Bracciolini (1380-1459) is credited for “rediscovering and recovering a great number of classical Latin manuscripts, mostly decaying and forgotten in German, Swiss, and French monastic libraries” (Wikipedia). Hochart believes that Tacitus’ books are not his only forgeries. Under suspicion come other works by Cicero, Lucretius, Vitruvius, and Quintilian, to name just a few. For instance, Lucretius’ only known work, De rerum natura “virtually disappeared during the Middle Ages, but was rediscovered in 1417 in a monastery in Germany by Poggio Bracciolini” (Wikipedia). So was Quintilian’s only extant work, a twelve-volume textbook on rhetoric entitled Institutio Oratoria, whose discovery Poggio recounts in a letter:

“There amid a tremendous quantity of books which it would take too long to describe, we found Quintilian still safe and sound, though filthy with mould and dust. For these books were not in the library, as befitted their worth, but in a sort of foul and gloomy dungeon at the bottom of one of the towers, where not even men convicted of a capital offence would have been stuck away.”

Provided Hochart is right, was Poggio the exception that confirms the rule of honesty among the humanists to whom humankind is indebted for “rediscovering” the great classics? Hardly, as we shall see. Even the great Erasmus (1465-1536) succumbed to the temptation of forging a treatise under the name of saint Cyprian (De duplici martyrio ad Fortunatum), which he pretended to have found by chance in an ancient library. Erasmus used this stratagem to voice his criticism of the Catholic confusion between virtue and suffering. In this case, heterodoxy gave the forger away. But how many forgeries went undetected for lack of originality? Giles Constable writes in “Forgery and Plagiarism in the Middle Ages”: “The secret of successful forgers and plagiarists is to attune the deceit so closely to the desires and standards of their age that it is not detected, or even suspected, at the time of creation.” In other words: “Forgeries and plagiarisms … follow rather than create fashion and can without paradox be considered among the most authentic products of their time.”[3]Giles Constable, “Forgery and Plagiarism in the Middle Ages,” in Culture and Spirituality in Medieval Europe, Variorum, 1996, p. 1-41, and on www.degruyter.com/abstract/j/afd.1983.29.issue-jg/afd.1983.29.jg.1/afd.1983.29.jg.1.xml

We are here focusing on literary forgeries, but there were other kinds. Michelangelo himself launched his own career by faking antique statues, including one known as the Sleeping Cupid (now lost), while under the employment of the Medici family in Florence. He used acidic earth to make the statue look antique. It was sold through a dealer to Cardinal Riario of San Giorgio, who eventually found out the hoax and demanded his money back, but didn’t press any charges against the artist. Apart from this recognized forgery, Lynn Catterson has made a strong case that the sculptural group of “Laocoon and his Sons,” dated from around 40 BC and supposedly discovered in 1506 in a vineyard in Rome and immediately acquired by Pope Julius II, is another of Michelangelo’s forgery (read here)[4]Lynn Catterson, “Michelangelo’s ‘Laocoön?’,” Artibus Et Historiae, vol. 26, n° 52, 2005, pp. 29–56, on www.jstor.org..

When one comes to think about it seriously, one can find several reasons to doubt that such masterworks were possible any time before the Renaissance, one of them having to do with the progress in human anatomy. Many other antique works raise similar questions. For instance, a comparison between Marcus Aurelius’ bronze equestrian statue (formely thought to be Constantine’s), with, say, Louis XIV’s, makes you wonder: how come nothing remotely approaching this level of achievement can be found between the fifth and the fifteenth century?[5]David Carrette, L’Invention du Moyen Âge. La plus grande falsification de l’histoire, Magazine Top-Secret, Hors-série n°9, 2014. Can we even be sure that Marcus Aurelius is a historical figure? “The major sources depicting the life and rule of Marcus are patchy and frequently unreliable” (Wikipedia), the most important one being the highly dubious Historia Augusta (more later).

The lucrative market of literary forgeries

“Literary Forgery in Early Modern Europe, 1450-1800” was the subject of a 2012 conference, whose proceedings were published in 2018 by the John Hopkins University Press (who also published a 440-page catalog, Bibliotheca Fictiva: A Collection of Books & Manuscripts Relating to Literary Forgery, 400 BC-AD 2000). One forger discussed in that book is Annius of Viterbo (1432-1502), who produced a collection of eleven texts, attributed to a Chaldean, an Egyptian, a Persian, and several ancient Greeks and Romans, purporting to show that his native town of Viterbo had been an important center of culture during the Etruscan period. Annius attributed his texts to recognizable ancient authors whose genuine works had conveniently perished, and he went on producing voluminous commentaries on his own forgeries.

This case illustrates the combination of political and mercantile motives in many literary forgeries. History-writing is a political act, and in the fifteenth century, it played a crucial role in the competition for prestige between Italian cities. Tacitus’ history of Rome was brought forward by Bracciolini thirty years after a Florentine chancellor by the name of Leonardo Bruni (1369-1444) wrote his History of the Florentine people (Historiae Florentini populi) in 12 volumes (by plagiarizing Byzantine chronicles). Political value translated into economic value, and the market for ancient works reached astronomical prices: it is said that with the sale of just a copy of a manuscript of Titus Livy, Bracciolini bought himself a villa in Florence. During the Renaissance, “the acquisition of classical artifacts had simply become the new fad, the new way of displaying power and status. Instead of collecting the bones and body parts of saints, towns and wealthy rulers now collected fragments of the ancient world. And just as with the relic trade, demand far outstripped supply” (from the website of San Diego’s “Museum of Hoaxes”).

In the mainstream of classical studies, ancient texts are assumed to be authentic if they are not proven forged. Cicero’s De Consolatione is now universally considered the work of Carolus Sigonius (1520-1584), an Italian humanist born in Modena, only because we have a letter by Sigonius himself admitting the forgery. But short of such a confession, or of some blatant anachronism, historians and classical scholars will simply ignore the possibility of fraud. They would never, for example, suspect Francesco Petrarca, known as Petrarch (1304-1374), of faking his discovery of Cicero’s letters, even though he went on publishing his own letters in perfect Ciceronian style. Jerry Brotton is not being ironic when he writes in The Renaissance Bazaar: “Cicero was crucial to Petrarch and the subsequent development of humanism because he offered a new way of thinking about how the cultured individual united the philosophical and contemplative side of life with its more active and public dimension. […] This was the blueprint for Petrarch’s humanism.”[6]Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar: From the Silk Road to Michelangelo, Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 66-67.

The medieval manuscripts found by Petrarch are long lost, so what evidence do we have of their authenticity, besides Petrarch’s reputation? Imagine if historians seriously questioned the authenticity of some of our most cherished classical treasures. How many of them would pass the test? If Hochart is right and Tacitus is removed from the list of reliable sources, the whole historical edifice of the Roman Empire suffers from a major structural failure, but what if other pillars of ancient historiography crumble under similar scrutiny? What about Titus Livy, author a century earlier than Tacitus of a monumental history of Rome in 142 verbose volumes, starting with the foundation of Rome in 753 BC through the reign of Augustus. It is admitted, since Louis de Beaufort’s critical analysis (1738), that the first five centuries of Livy’s history are a web of fiction.[7]Louis de Beaufort, Dissertation sur l’incertitude des cinq premiers siècles de l’histoire romaine (1738), on www.mediterranee-antique.fr/Fichiers_PdF/ABC/Beaufort/Dissertation.pdf. But can we trust the rest of it? It was also Petrarch, Brotton informs us, who “began piecing together texts like Livy’s History of Rome, collating different manuscript fragments, correcting corruptions in the language, and imitating its style in writing a more linguistically fluent and rhetorically persuasive form of Latin.”[8]Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar, op. cit., pp. 66-67. None of the manuscripts used by Petrarch are available anymore.

What about the Augustan History (Historia Augusta), a Roman chronicle that Edward Gibbon trusted entirely for writing his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? It has since been exposed as the work of an impostor who has masked his fraud by inventing sources from scratch. However, for some vague reason, it is assumed that the forger lived in the fifth century, which is supposed to make his forgery worthwhile anyway. In reality, some of its stories sound like cryptic satire of Renaissance mores, others like Christian calumny of pre-Christian religion. How likely is it, for example, that the hero Antinous, worshipped throughout the Mediterranean Basin as an avatar of Osiris, was the gay lover (eromenos) of Hadrian, as told in Augustan History? Such questions of plausibility are simply ignored by professional historians.[9]It is never raised, for example, by Royston Lambert in his Beloved and God: The Story of Hadrian and Antinous, Phoenix Giant, 1984. But they jump to the face of any lay reader unimpressed by scholarly consensus. For instance, just reading the summary of Suetonius’ Lives of the Twelve Cesars on the Wikipedia page should suffice to raise very strong suspicions, not only of fraud, but of mockery, for we are obviously dealing here with biographies of great imagination, but of no historical value whatsoever.

Works of fiction also come under suspicion. We owe the complete version of The Satyricon, supposedly written under Nero, to a manuscript discovered by Poggio Bracciolini in Cologne.[10]Petronius, The Satyricon, trans. P. D. Walsh , Oxford UP, 1997, “Introduction,” p. xxxv. Apuleius’ novel The Golden Ass was also found by Poggio in the same manuscript as the fragments of Tacitus’ Annales and Histories. It was unknown before the thirteenth century, and its central piece, the tale of Cupid and Psyche, seems derived from the more archaic version found in the twelfth-century Roman de Partonopeu de Blois.[11]Gédéon Huet, “Le Roman d’Apulée était-il connu au Moyen Âge ?”, Le Moyen Âge, 22 (1909), pp. 23-28.

The question can be raised of why Romans would bother writing and copying such works on papyrus volumen, but the more important question is: Why would medieval monks copy and preserve them on expensive parchments? This question applies to all pagan authors, for none of them reached the Renaissance in manuscripts allegedly older than the ninth century. “Did the monks, out of pure scientific interest, have a duty to preserve for posterity, for the greater glory of paganism, the masterpieces of antiquity?” asks Hochart.

And not only masterpieces, but bundles of letters! In the early years of the sixteenth century, the Veronian Fra Giovanni Giocondo discovered a volume of 121 letters exchanged between Pliny the Younger (friend of Tacitus) and Emperor Trajan around the year 112. This “book”, writes Latinist scholar Jacques Heurgon, “had disappeared during the whole Middle Ages, and one could believe it definitively lost, when it suddenly emerged, in the very first years of the sixteenth century, in a single manuscript which, having been copied, partially, then completely, was lost again.”[12]https://www.persee.fr/doc/bsnaf_0081-1181_1958_num_1...1_5488 Such unsuspecting presentation is illustrative of the blind confidence of classical scholars in their Latin sources, unknown in the Middle Ages and magically appearing from nowhere in the Renaissance.

The strangest thing, Hochart remarks, is that Christian monks are supposed to have copied thousands of pagan volumes on expensive parchment, only to treat them as worthless rubbish:

“To explain how many works of Latin authors had remained unknown to scholars of previous centuries and were uncovered by Renaissance scholars, it was said that monks had generally relegated to the attics or cellars of their convents most of the pagan writings that had been in their libraries. It was therefore among the discarded objects, sometimes among the rubbish, when they were allowed to search there, that the finders of manuscripts found, they claimed, the masterpieces of antiquity.”

In medieval convents, manuscript copying was a commercial craft, and focused exclusively on religious books such as psalters, gospels, missals, catechisms, and saints’ legends. They were mostly copied on papyrus. Parchment and vellum were reserved for luxury books, and since it was a very expensive material, it was common practice to scrape old scrolls in order to reuse them. Pagan works were the first to disappear. In fact, their destruction, rather than their preservation, was considered a holy deed, as hagiographers abundantly illustrate in their saints’ lives.

How real is Julius Caesar?

Independently of Hochart, and on the basis of philological considerations, Robert Baldauf, professor at the university of Basle, argued that many of the most famous ancient Latin and Greek works are of late medieval origin (Historie und Kritik, 1902). “Our Romans and Greeks have been Italian humanists,” he says. They have given us a whole fantasy world of Antiquity that “has rooted itself in our perception to such an extent that no positivist criticisms can make humanity doubt its veracity.”

Baldauf points out, for example, German and Italian influences in Horace’s Latin. On similar grounds, he concludes that Julius Cesar’s books, so appreciated for their exquisite Latin, are late medieval forgeries. Recent historians of Gaul, now informed by archeology, are actually puzzled by Cesar’s Commentarii de Bello Gallico—our only source on the elusive Vercingetorix. Everything in there that doesn’t come from book XXIII of Poseidonios’ Histories appears either wrong or unreliable in terms of geography, demography, anthropology, and religion.[13]Jean-Louis Brunaux, The Celtic Gauls: Gods, Rites, and Santuaries, Routledge, 1987; David Henige, “He came, he saw, we counted: the historiography and demography of Caesar’s gallic numbers,” Annales de démographie historique, 1998-1, pp. 215-242, on www.persee.fr

A great mystery hangs over the supposed author himself. We are taught that “Caesar” was a cognomen (nickname) of unknown meaning and origin, and that it was adopted immediately after Julius Caesar’s death as imperial title; we are asked to believe, in other words, that the emperors all called themselves Caesar in memory of that general and dictator who was not even emperor, and that the term gained such prestige that it went on to be adopted by Russian “Czars” and German “Kaisers”. But that etymology has long been challenged by those (including Voltaire) who claim that Caesar comes from an Indo-European root word meaning “king”, which also gave the Persian Khosro. These two origins cannot both be true, and the second seems well grounded.

Cesar’s gentilice (surname) Iulius does not ease our perplexity. We are told by Virgil that it goes back to Cesar’s supposed ancestor Iulus or Iule. But Virgil also tells us (drawing from Cato the Elder, c. 168 BC) that it is the short name of Jupiter (Jul Pater). And it happens to be an Indo-European root word designating the sunlight or the day sky, identical to the Scandinavian name for the solar god, Yule (Helios for the Greeks, Haul for the Gauls, Hel for the Germans, from which derives the French Noël, Novo Hel). Is “Julius Caesar” the “Sun King”?

Consider, in addition, that: 1. Roman emperors were traditionally declared adoptive sons of the sun-god Jupiter or of the “Undefeated Sun” (Sol Invictus). 2. The first emperor, Octavian Augustus, was allegedly the adoptive son of Julius Caesar, whom he divinized under the name Iulius Caesar Divus (celebrated on January 1), while renaming in his honor the first month of summer, July. If Augustus is both the adoptive son of the divine Sun and the adoptive son of the divine Julius, and if in addition Julius or Julus is the divine name of the Sun, it means that the divine Julius is none other than the divine Sun (and the so-called “Julian” calendar simply meant the “solar” calendar). Julius Caesar has been brought down from heaven to earth, transposed from mythology to history. That is a common process in Roman history, according to Georges Dumézil, who explains the notorious poverty of Roman mythology by the fact that it “was radically destroyed at the level of theology [but] flourished in the form of history,” which is to say that Roman history is a literary fiction built on mythical structures.[14]Georges Dumézil, Heur et malheur du guerrier. Aspects mythiques de la fonction guerrière chez les Indo-Européens (1969), Flammarion, 1985, p. 66 and 16.

The mystery surrounding Julius Caesar is of course of great consequence, since on him rests the historiography of Imperial Rome. If Julius Caesar is a fiction, then so is much of Imperial Rome. Note that, on the coins attributed to his era, the first emperor is simply named Augustus Caesar, which is not a name, but a title that could be applied to any emperor.

At this point, most readers will have lost patience. With those whose curiosity surpasses their skepticism, we shall now argue that Imperial Rome is actually, for a large part, a fictitious mirror image of Constantinople, a fantasy that started emerging in the eleventh century in the context of the cultural war waged by the papacy against the Byzantine empire, and solidified in the fifteenth century, in the context of the plunder of Byzantine culture that is known as the Renaissance. This, of course, will raise many objections, some of which will be addressed here, others in further articles.

First objection: Wasn’t Constantinople founded by a Roman emperor, namely Constantine the Great? So it is said. But then, how real is this legendary Constantine?

How real is Constantine the Great?

If Julius Caesar is the alpha of the Western Roman Empire, Constantine is the omega. One major difference between them is the nature of our sources. For Constantine’s biography, we are totally dependent on Christian authors, beginning with Eusebius of Caesarea, whose Life of Constantine, including the story of the emperor’s conversion to Christianity, is a mixture of eulogy and hagiography.

The common notion derived from Eusebius is that Constantine moved the capital of his Empire from Rome to Byzantium, which he renamed in his own honor. But that general narrative of the first translatio imperii is itself replete with inner contradictions. First, Constantine didn’t really move his capital to the East, because he was himself from the East. He was born in Naissus (today Nis in Serbia), in the region then called Moesia, West of Thracia. According to standard history, Constantine had never set foot in Rome before he marched on the city and conquered it from Maxentius.

Constantine wasn’t just a Roman who happened to be born in Moesia. His father Constantius also came from Moesia. And so did his predecessor Diocletian, who was born in Moesia, built his palace there (Split, today in Croatia), and died there. In Byzantine chronicles, Diocletian is given as Dux Moesiae (Wikipedia), which can mean “king of Moesia”, for well into the Early Middle Ages, dux was more or less synonymous with rex.[15]Dux Francorum and rex Francorum were used interchangibly for Peppin II, for example.

Textbook history tells us that, on becoming emperor, Diocletian decided to share his power with Maximian as co-emperor. That is already odd enough. But instead of keeping for himself the historical heart of the empire, he left it to his subordinate and settled in the East. Seven years later, he divided the Empire further into a tetrarchy; instead of one Augustus Caesar, there was now two Augustus and two Caesars. Diocletian retired to the far eastern part of Asia Minor, bordering on Persia. Like Constantine after him, Diocletian never reigned in Rome; he visited it once in his lifetime.

This leads us to the second inner contradiction of the translatio imperii paradigm: Constantine didn’t really move the imperial capital from Rome to Byzantium, because Rome had ceased to be the imperial capital in 286, being replaced by Milan. By the time of Diocletian and Constantine, the whole of Italy had actually fallen into anarchy during the Crisis of the Third Century (AD 235–284). When in 402 AD, the Eastern emperor Honorius restored order in the Peninsula, he transferred its capital to Ravenna on the Adriatic coast. So from 286 on, we are supposed to have a Roman Empire with a deserted Rome.

The conundrum only thickens when we compare Roman and Byzantine cultures. According to the translatio imperii paradigm, the Eastern Roman Empire is the continuation of the Western Roman Empire. But Byzantium scholars insist on the great differences between the Greek-speaking Byzantine civilization and the earlier civilization of the Latium. Byzantinist Anthony Kaldellis wrote:

“The Byzantines were not a warlike people. […] They preferred to pay their enemies either to go away or to fight among themselves. Likewise, the court at the heart of their empire sought to buy allegiance with honors, fancy titles, bales of silk, and streams of gold. Politics was the cunning art of providing just the right incentives to win over supporters and keep them loyal. Money, silk, and titles were the empire’s preferred instruments of governance and foreign policy, over swords and armies.”[16]Anthony Kaldellis, Streams of Gold, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium, 955 A.D. to the First Crusade, Oxford UP, 2019, p. xxvii.

The Byzantine civilization owed nothing to Rome. It inherited all its philosophical, scientific, poetic, mythological, and artistic tradition from classical Greece. Culturally, it was closer to Persia and Egypt than to Italy, which it treated as a colony. At the dawn of the second millenium AD, it had almost no recollection of its supposed Latin past, to the point that the most famous byzantine philosopher of the eleventh century, Michael Psellos, confused Cicero with Caesar.

How does the textbook story of Constantine’s translatio imperii fit in this perspective? It doesn’t. In fact, the notion is highly problematic. Unwilling, for good reasons, to accept at face value the Christian tale that Constantine settled in Byzantium in order to leave Rome to the Pope, historians struggle to find a reasonable explanation for the transfer, and they generally settle for this one: after the old capital had fallen into irreversible decadence (soon to be sacked by the Gauls), Constantine decided to move the heart of the Empire closer to its most endangered borders. Does that make any sense? Even if it did, how plausible is the transfer of an imperial capital over a thousand miles, with senators, bureaucrats and armies, resulting in the metamorphosis of a Roman empire into another Roman empire with a totally different political structure, language, culture, and religion?

One of the major sources of this preposterous concept is the false Donation of Constantine. While it is admitted that this document was forged by medieval popes in order to justify their claim on Rome, its basic premise, the translation of the imperial capital to the East, has not been questioned. We suggest that Constantine’s translatio imperii was actually a mythological cover for the very real opposite movement of translatio studii, the transfer of Byzantine culture to the West that started before the crusades and evolved into systematic plunder after. Late medieval Roman culture rationalized and disguised its less than honorable Byzantine origin by the opposite myth of the Roman origin of Constantinople.

This will become clearer in the next article, but here is already one example of an insurmountable contradiction to the accepted filiation between the Eastern Roman Empire and the Western Roman Empire. One of the most fundamental and precious legacy of the Romans to our Western civilization is their tradition of civil law. Roman law is still the foundation of our legal system. How come, then, that Roman law was imported to Italy from Byzantium at the end of the eleventh century? Specialists like Harold Berman or Aldo Schiavone are adamant that knowledge of Roman laws had totally disappeared for 700 years in Western Europe, until a Byzantine copy of their compilation by Justinian (the Digesta) was discovered around 1080 by Bolognese scholars. This “700-year long eclipse” of Roman law in the West, is an undisputed yet almost incomprehensible phenomenon .[17]Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution, the Formation of the Western Legal Tradition, Harvard UP, 1983; Aldo Schiavone, The Invention of Law in the West, Harvard UP, 2012.

Who were the first “Romans”

One obvious objection to the idea that the relationship between Rome and Constantinople has been inverted is that the Byzantines called themselves Romans (Romaioi), and believed they were living in Romania. Persians, Arabs and Turks called them Roumis. Even the Greeks of the Hellenic Peninsula called themselves Romaioi in Late Antiquity, despite their detestation of the Latins. This is taken as proof that the Byzantines considered themselves the heirs of the Roman Empire of the West, founded in Rome, Italy. But it is not. Strangely enough, mythography and etymology both suggest that, just like the name “Caesar”, the name “Rome” travelled from East to West, rather than the other way. Romos, latinized in Romus or Remus, is a Greek word meaning “strong”. The Italian Romans were Etruscans from Lydia in Asia Minor. They were well aware of their eastern origin, the memory of which was preserved in their legends. According to the tradition elaborated by Virgil in his epic Aeneid, Rome was founded by Aeneas from Troy, in the immediate vicinity of the Bosphorus. According to another version, Rome was founded by Romos, the son of Odysseus and Circe.[18]Sander M. Goldberg, Epic in Republican Rome, Oxford UP, 1995, pp. 50-51. The historian Strabo, supposedly living in the first century BC (but quoted only from the fifth century AD), reports that “another older tradition makes Rome an Arcadian colony,” and insists that “Rome itself was of Hellenic origin” (Geographia V, 3). Denys of Halicarnassus in his Roman Antiquities, declares “Rome is a Greek city.” His thesis is summed up by the syllogism: “The Romans descend from the Trojans. But the Trojans are of Greek origin. So the Romans are of Greek origin.”

The famous legend of Romulus and Remus, told by Titus Livy (I, 3), is generally considered of later origin. It could very well be an invention of the late Middle Age. Anatoly Fomenko, of whom we will have more to say later on, believes that its central theme, the simultaneous foundation of two cities, one by Romulus on the Palatine Hill, and the other by Remus on the Aventine, is a mythical reflection of the struggle for ascendency between the two Romes. As we shall see, the murder of Remus by Romulus is a fitting allegory of the events unfolding from the fourth crusade.[19]Anatoly T. Fomenko, History: Fiction or Science? vol. 1, Delamere Publishing, 2003, p. 357. Interestingly, that legend evokes the history of the brothers Valens and Valentinian, who are said to have reigned respectively over Constantinople and Rome from 364 to 378 (their story is known from one single author, Ammianus Marcellinus, a Greek writing in Latin). It happens that valens is a Latin equivalent for the Greek romos.

We have started this article by suggesting that much of the history of the Western Roman Empire is of Renaissance invention. But as we progress in our investigation, another complementary hypothesis will emerge: much of the history of the Western Roman Empire is borrowed from the history of the Eastern Roman Empire, either by deliberate plagiarism, or by confusion resulting from the fact that the Byzantines called themselves Romans and their city Rome. The process can be inferred from some obvious duplicates. Here is one example, taken from Latin historian Jordanes, whose Origin and Deeds of the Goths is notoriously full of anachronisms: in 441, Attila crossed the Danube, invaded the Balkans, and threatened Constantinople, but could not take the city and retreated with an immense booty. Ten years later, the same Attila crossed the Alps, invaded Italy, and threatened Rome, but couldn’t take the city and retreated with an immense booty .

The mysterious origin of Latin

Another objection against questioning the existence of the Western Roman Empire is the spread of Latin throughout the Mediterranean world and beyond. It is admitted that Latin, originally the language spoken in the Latium, is the origin of French, Italian, Occitan, Catalan, Spanish and Portuguese, called “Western Romance Languages”. However, the amateur historian and linguist M. J. Harper has made the following remark:

“The linguistic evidence mirrors the geography with great precision: Portuguese resembles Spanish more than any other language; French resembles Occitan more than any other; Occitan resembles Catalan, Catalan resembles Spanish and so forth. So which was the Ur-language? Can’t tell; it could be any of them. Or it could be a language that has long since disappeared. But the original language cannot have been Latin. All the Romance languages, even Portuguese and Italian, resemble one another more than any of them resemble Latin, and do so by a wide margin.”[20]M. J. Harper, The History of Britain Revealed, Icon Books, 2006, p. 116.

For that reason, linguists postulate that “Romance languages” do not derive directly from Latin, but from Vulgar Latin, the popular and colloquial sociolect of Latin spoken by soldiers, settlers, and merchants of the Roman Empire. What was Vulgar Latin, or proto-Romance, like? No one knows.

As a matter of fact, the language that most resembles Latin is Romanian, which, although divided in several dialects, constitutes by itself the only member of the Eastern branch of Romance languages. It is the only Romance language that has maintained archaic traits of Latin, such as the case system (endings of words depending on their role in the sentence) and the neutral gender.[21]Clara Miller-Broomfield, “Romanian: The forgotten Romance language”, 2015.

But how did Romanians come to speak Vulgar Latin? There is another mystery there. Part of the linguistic area of Romanian was conquered by Emperor Trajan in 106 AD, and formed the Roman province of Dacia for a mere 165 years. One or two legions were stationed in the South-West of Dacia, and, although not Italians, they are supposed to have communicated in Vulgar Latin and imposed their language to the whole country, even north of the Danube, where there was no Roman presence. What language did people speak in Dacia before the Romans conquered the south part of it? No one has a clue. The “Dacian language” “is an extinct language, … poorly documented. … only one Dacian inscription is believed to have survived.” Only 160 Romanian words are hypothetically of Dacian origin. Dacian is believed to be closely related to Thracian, itself “an extinct and poorly attested language.”

Let me repeat: The inhabitants of Dacia north of the Danube adopted Latin from the non-Italian legions that stationed on the lower part of their territory from 106 to 271 AD, and completely forgot their original language, to the point that no trace of it is left. They were so Romanized that their country came to be called Romania, and that Romanian is now closer to Latin than are other European Romance languages. Yet the Romans hardly ever occupied Dacia (on the map above, Dacia is not even counted as part of the Roman Empire). The next part is also extraordinary: Dacians, who had so easily given up their original language for Vulgar Latin, then became so attached to Vulgar Latin that the German invaders, who caused the Romans to retreat in 271, failed to impose their language. So did the Huns and, more surprisingly, the Slavs, who dominated the area since the seventh century and left many traces in the toponymy. Less than ten percent of Romanian words are of Slavic origin (but the Romanians adopted Slavonic for their liturgy).

One more thing: although Latin was a written language in the Empire, Romanians are believed to have never had a written language until the Middle Ages. The first document written in Romanian goes back to the sixteenth century, and it is written in Cyrillic alphabet.

Obviously, there is room for the following alternative theory: Latin is a language originating from Dacia; ancient Dacian did not vanish mysteriously but is the common ancestor of both Latin and modern Romanian. Dacian, if you will, is Vulgar Latin, which preceded Classical Latin. A likely explanation for the fact that Dacia is also called Romania is that it—rather than Italy—was the original home of the Romans who founded Constantinople.[22]We need to take into account that Southeastern Romania is located in the Pontic Steppe which, according to the widely held Kurgan hypothesis, is the original home of the earliest proto-Indo-European speech community. That would be consistent with the notion that the Roman language (Latin) remained the administrative language of the Eastern Empire until the sixth century AD, when it was abandoned for Greek, the language spoken by the majority of its subjects. That, in turn, is consistent with the character of Latin itself. Harper makes the following remark:

“Latin is not a natural language. When written, Latin takes up approximately half the space of written Italian or written French (or written English, German or any natural European language). Since Latin appears to have come into existence in the first half of the first millennium BC, which was the time when alphabets were first spreading through the Mediterranean basin, it seems a reasonable working hypothesis to assume that Latin was originally a shorthand compiled by Italian speakers for the purposes of written (confidential? commercial?) communication. This would explain:

a) the very close concordance between Italian and Latin vocabulary;

b) the conciseness of Latin in, for instance, dispensing with separate prepositions, compound verb forms and other ‘natural’ language impedimenta;

c) the unusually formal rules governing Latin grammar and syntax;

d) the lack of irregular, non-standard usages;

e) the unusual adoption among Western European languages of a specifically vocative case (‘Dear Marcus, re. you letter of…’).[23]M. J. Harper, The History of Britain Revealed, op. cit., pp. 130-131.

The hypothesis that Latin was a “non-demotic” language, a koine of the empire, a cultural artifact developed for the purpose of writing, was first proposed by Russian researchers Igor Davidenko and Jaroslav Kesler in The Book of Civilizations (2001).

How old is ancient Roman architecture?

The strongest objection against the theory that ancient Imperial Rome is a fiction is, of course, her many architectural vestiges. This subject will be more fully explored in a later article, but a quotation from Viscount James Bryce’s influential work, The Holy Roman Empire (1864), will point to the answer:

“The modern traveller, after his first few days in Rome, when he has looked out upon the Campagna from the summit of St. Peter’s, paced the chilly corridors of the Vatican, and mused under the echoing dome of the Pantheon, when he has passed in review the monuments of regal and republican and papal Rome, begins to seek for some relics of the twelve hundred years that lie between Constantine and Pope Julius the Second. ‘Where,’ he asks, ‘is the Rome of the Middle Ages, the Rome of Alberic and Hildebrand and Rienzi? the Rome which dug the graves of so many Teutonic hosts; whither the pilgrims flocked; whence came the commands at which kings bowed? Where are the memorials of the brightest age of Christian architecture, the age which reared Cologne and Rheims and Westminster, which gave to Italy the cathedrals of Tuscany and the wave-washed palaces of Venice?’ To this question there is no answer. Rome, the mother of the arts, has scarcely a building to commemorate those times.”[24]Viscount James Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire (1864), on www.gutenberg.org

Officially, there is hardly a medieval vestige in Rome, and the same applies to other Italian cities believed to have been founded during Antiquity. François de Sarre, a French contributor to the field of research here presented, was first intrigued by the magnificent palace of the Roman emperor Diocletian (284-305 AD), in the center of the city of Split, today in Croatia. The Renaissance constructions are integrated to it in such a perfect architectural ensemble as to be almost indistinguishable. It is hard to believe that ten centuries separate the two stages of construction, as if the ancient buildings had been left untouched during the whole Middle Ages.[25]François de Sarre, Mais où est donc passé le Moyen Âge ? Le récentisme, Hadès, 2013, available here.

Also puzzling is the little-known fact that ancient Roman architecture used advanced technologies such as concretes of remarkable quality (read here and here), used for example to build the Pantheon’s beautifully preserved dome. The secrets of fabrication of Roman concrete is described in Vitruvius’ multi-volume work entitled De architectura (first century BC). Medieval men, we are told, were totally ignorant of this technology, because “Vitruvius’ works were largely forgotten until 1414, when De architectura was ‘rediscovered’ by the Florentine humanist Poggio Bracciolini in the library of Saint Gall Abbey” (Wikipedia).[26]More on Roman concrete in Lynne Lancaster, Concrete Vaulted Construction in Imperial Rome: Innovations in Context, Cambridge UP, 2005.

As a temporary conclusion: all the oddities that we have pointed out are like pieces of a puzzle that do not fit well within our conventional representation. We will later be able to assemble them into a more plausible picture. But before that, in the next article, we will focus on ecclesiastical literature from Late Antiquity to the Middle Ages, for it is the original source of the great historical distortion that later took a life of its own before being standardized as the dogma of modern chronology and historiography.

Notes

[1] Polydor Hochart, De l’authenticité des Annales et des Histoires de Tacite, 1890 (on archive.org), pp. viii-ix.

[2] David Schaps, “The Found and Lost Manuscripts of Tacitus’ De Agricola,” Classical Philology, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan., 1979), pp. 28-42, on www.jstor.org.

[3] Giles Constable, “Forgery and Plagiarism in the Middle Ages,” in Culture and Spirituality in Medieval Europe, Variorum, 1996, p. 1-41, and on www.degruyter.com/abstract/j/afd.1983.29.issue-jg/afd.1983.29.jg.1/afd.1983.29.jg.1.xml

[4] Lynn Catterson, “Michelangelo’s ‘Laocoön?’,” Artibus Et Historiae, vol. 26, n° 52, 2005, pp. 29–56, on www.jstor.org.

[5] David Carrette, L’Invention du Moyen Âge. La plus grande falsification de l’histoire, Magazine Top-Secret, Hors-série n°9, 2014.

[6] Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar: From the Silk Road to Michelangelo, Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 66-67.

[7] Louis de Beaufort, Dissertation sur l’incertitude des cinq premiers siècles de l’histoire romaine (1738), on www.mediterranee-antique.fr/Fichiers_PdF/ABC/Beaufort/Dissertation.pdf.

[8] Jerry Brotton, The Renaissance Bazaar, op. cit., pp. 66-67.

[9] It is never raised, for example, by Royston Lambert in his Beloved and God: The Story of Hadrian and Antinous, Phoenix Giant, 1984.

[10] Petronius, The Satyricon, trans. P. D. Walsh , Oxford UP, 1997, “Introduction,” p. xxxv.

[11] Gédéon Huet, “Le Roman d’Apulée était-il connu au Moyen Âge ?”, Le Moyen Âge, 22 (1909), pp. 23-28.

[12] https://www.persee.fr/doc/bsnaf_0081-1181_1958_num_1956_1_5488

[13] Jean-Louis Brunaux, The Celtic Gauls: Gods, Rites, and Santuaries, Routledge, 1987; David Henige, “He came, he saw, we counted: the historiography and demography of Caesar’s gallic numbers,” Annales de démographie historique, 1998-1, pp. 215-242, on www.persee.fr

[14] Georges Dumézil, Heur et malheur du guerrier. Aspects mythiques de la fonction guerrière chez les Indo-Européens (1969), Flammarion, 1985, p. 66 and 16.

[15] Dux Francorum and rex Francorum were used interchangibly for Peppin II, for example.

[16] Anthony Kaldellis, Streams of Gold, Rivers of Blood: The Rise and Fall of Byzantium, 955 A.D. to the First Crusade, Oxford UP, 2019, p. xxvii.

[17] Harold J. Berman, Law and Revolution, the Formation of the Western Legal Tradition, Harvard UP, 1983; Aldo Schiavone, The Invention of Law in the West, Harvard UP, 2012.

[18] Sander M. Goldberg, Epic in Republican Rome, Oxford UP, 1995, pp. 50-51.

[19] Anatoly T. Fomenko, History: Fiction or Science? vol. 1, Delamere Publishing, 2003, p. 357.

[20] M. J. Harper, The History of Britain Revealed, Icon Books, 2006, p. 116.

[21] Clara Miller-Broomfield, “Romanian: The forgotten Romance language”, 2015.

[22] We need to take into account that Southeastern Romania is located in the Pontic Steppe which, according to the widely held Kurgan hypothesis, is the original home of the earliest proto-Indo-European speech community.

[23] M. J. Harper, The History of Britain Revealed, op. cit., pp. 130-131.

[24] Viscount James Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire (1864), on www.gutenberg.org

[25] François de Sarre, Mais où est donc passé le Moyen Âge ? Le récentisme, Hadès, 2013, available here.

[26] More on Roman concrete in Lynne Lancaster, Concrete Vaulted Construction in Imperial Rome: Innovations in Context, Cambridge UP, 2005.

 
Hide 769 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. trelane says:

    Very interesting. Our history may be much more recent than we had previously thought.

    • Replies: @Jake
    , @Richard B
    , @anon
    , @ivan
    , @al007
  2. Big Daddy says:

    Well, shit, is anything for real? I was always somewhat sceptical of all the humanistic writings of folks who enjoyed blood lust for entertainment and made constant war their life’s work.

    • Replies: @Richard B
  3. Is the author somehow ignorant of the magnificent account given by Murika’s own beloved scholar Grandpa Sniffy, presently running to unseat the Grand Duck of Orange occupying the great palace of white sitting at the epicenter of the Greatest Dismal Swamp in the Universe?? All history before the present day is fake. The Romans were really black kangz who descended from the mothership originating the Wokeunduh cluster. In later times they were led by Corn Pop, who was such a fierce ruler that only the impassioned pleas of Grandpa Sniffy – then a strapping lifeguard at the Public Baths of Wilmington – prevented him from conquering the entire planet. We need a statue raised to Corn Pop to replace the wretched leftover from the rotten French Third Republic sent to NYC in the 1880s, so those arriving can see what Murika is really about.

    How dare you?! Good day, sir!

  4. J says:

    The statement that Latin is not a spoken but synthetic language seems to me reasonable. It is very concise, complicated and legalistic. Yet Roman roads and waterworks are still standing and were not built during the Renaissance.

  5. Tom67 says:

    I studied classical Latin for ten years and have a reasonable to superficial knowledge of French, Italian and Spanish. You quote Harper approvingly in that:

    “The linguistic evidence mirrors the geography with great precision: Portuguese resembles Spanish more than any other language; French resembles Occitan more than any other; Occitan resembles Catalan, Catalan resembles Spanish and so forth. So which was the Ur-language? Can’t tell; it could be any of them. Or it could be a language that has long since disappeared. But the original language cannot have been Latin. All the Romance languages, even Portuguese and Italian, resemble one another more than any of them resemble Latin, and do so by a wide margin.”

    That is pure and utter bulshit. French doesn´t resemble Occitan more than any other. There is a veritable gulf betweenb the two. In fact French is in a league of its own. It has very strong Germanic influence and it is very easy to demonstrate the fact that it is the furthest from classical Latin and also least resembles the other Romanic languages. It is simply not true that all the Romanic languages resemble each other more that than any one of them resembles Latin. All one needs is to take French, Italian and Latin.

    Finally it has long been known that Vulgar Latin was the ancestor of the Romanic languages and not classical Latin. But that doesn´t mean that Vulgar Latin originated in Rumania. That is absolutely laughable. Its a total non sequitur. It is rather the case that classical Latin had of course changed from the time of its inception until the break up of the empire. A change that wasn´t reflected in the writing. English speakers are well acquainted with this phenomen. English is still written as it was spoken several centuries ago although the language has changed very much. That is why English is so extraordinarily difficult to spell. German and Russian spelling were both codified a mere 100- 150 years ago. Therefore the spelling much more accords to the spoken.

    Finally about the conciseness of Latin which supposedly shows that it came into being as a sort of shorthand: it is easy to demonstrate that all Indoeuropean languages are moving from a complex grammar that allows the concise conveyance of meaning to a simplified grammar that needs more words.

    Case in point would be Sanskrit vs Hindi. Althochdeutsch vs Hochdeutsch. Old English vs Modern English. Church Slavonic vs Bulgarian. a.s.o. a.s.o.

    Having dissected just a small part of the authours argument I feel I cannot trust the gist of his writing. It might very well be that a good part of what we consider to be classical Latin writing was in fact invented in the Rennaissance. But the Latin that the forgers were basing their forgeries on was nevertheless already extant. Take Ciceros most important work “De Republica”. It was in fact found in 1809 in a Palimpsest. (Pergament that was overwritten).It is definately from the 4th century and comparing it to earlier finds one sees no great discrepancies. And there are many more such cases. If the Rennaissance was the only time when Latin writers were discovered one might follow the authour. In reality there are many finds before and after the Renaissance.

  6. 22pp22 says:

    This is rubbish. Real rubbish. Total rubbish.

    • Disagree: Hippopotamusdrome
    • Replies: @anon
    , @utu
  7. 22pp22 says:
    @J

    De Bello Gallico is simple, easy to read and a perfectly organic language. There are plenty of later authors who wrote less erudite Latin than Cicero. De medicamentis liber, Mulomedicina Chironis and De re Coquinaria include colloquialisms and grammatical mistakes that anticipate later Romance languages.

    Later in the seventeenth century, Ciceronian Latin was spoken fluently by Japanese converts trained at the Jesuit seminary at Arima. I have read the correspondence of one called Pedro Cassui. He walked to Europe and became the first Japanese to visit the Middle East.

    Hadrian’s Wall is still there and the original letters written by the families of the men who garrisoned it have been preserved in the mud.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindolanda_tablets

    This article is complete garbage.

    • Agree: Poco, Seraphim
    • Replies: @Franz
    , @J
    , @Stebbing Heuer
  8. Thank you for a brilliantly fascinating historical article … even if its ideas don’t all fully bear out, many things are illuminated by the thinking here

    Such as the strange ‘fact’ that leading Romans ‘walked away from using Latin’ in literary works after the early 100s CE, and thus, e.g., that ‘Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius’ wrote the wonderful ‘Meditations’, allegedly from the late 100s CE, in Greek

    This article also reminds of what is perhaps the greatest of all literary frauds of history –

    Most people don’t know that the most ancient ‘Bible texts’ are not in Hebrew but in Greek, the Septuagint of the 200s BCE, whose composition – fraudulent fabrication? – began to take place about 40-60 years after the death of Alexander the Great … allegedly a ‘translation of lost Hebrew’ … But no older Hebrew text has ever been found

    It seems that Jews took their semitic tribal stories, and made a ‘bible’ linking those stories as involving Egypt’s greatest-of-all-in-the-area civilisation … An Egypt which yet seems to have no records of Jews, Exodus etc tho records of everything else … Jews writing this in Greek, the dominant imperial and international language of the region and era … The Old Testament Bible thus perhaps a giant tribal hoax of Jews seeking to glamourise themselves

    As Roman soldieris crushed the Jews in Palestine, the Jew Paul helped create – fabricate? – Christianity, with its theme of making Jews holy and ‘chosen by God’, and its Buddhist borrowings ascribed to Jesus’ lips, undermining martial spirit, Western Rome collapsing quickly under this influence

    Byzantines in Constantinople then placed severe limits on Jews, barring Jews from government and educaton, after which a Jewish-linked trader named Mohammed, ‘received from an angel’ his texts also putting Jews on a pedestal as holy, leading to Muslim armies taking Palestine and giving Jews back high status everywhere the Muslim armies advanced

  9. R.C. says:

    Fascinating! I’m open to the theories; all I know is that the more I learn, the less I know what I know.
    R.C.

  10. Malla says:

    The historian Strabo, supposedly living in the first century BC (but quoted only from the fifth century AD), reports that “another older tradition makes Rome an Arcadian colony,” and insists that “Rome itself was of Hellenic origin” (Geographia V, 3). Denys of Halicarnassus in his Roman Antiquities, declares “Rome is a Greek city.” His thesis is summed up by the syllogism: “The Romans descend from the Trojans. But the Trojans are of Greek origin. So the Romans are of Greek origin.”

    The famous legend of Romulus and Remus, told by Titus Livy (I, 3), is generally considered of later origin. It could very well be an invention of the late Middle Age.

    The great Persian Scholar Al Biruni believed that the Romans were originally Franks (Firangis, Farangs) which could mean Gaul + Germania?

    Abu Rayhan al-Biruni (973 – after 1050) was a famous Iranian scholar and polymath during the Islamic Golden Age. Al-Biruni was well versed in physics, mathematics, astronomy, and natural sciences, and also distinguished himself as a historian, chronologist and linguist. In his book on India (Tārīkh al-Hind) , he writes
    “The Romans have, regarding this question, the following tradition: — Romulus and Romamis (3),
    the two brothers from the country of the Franks, on having ascended the throne, built the city of Rome. Then Romulus killed his brother, and the consequence was a long succession of intestine troubles and wars. “

  11. Steven80 says:

    The modern name of the Romanian state was adopted by Prince Charles of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen because he wanted to rula a state that claims continuity from ancient Rome, similar to the continuity claimed by the Holy Roman Empire. That is well documented. Before that age (middle of 19-th century) , in all documents, there is no Romania north of the Danube – there is Wlachhia and Moldavia, and so were called the people living there. There was a province by the name of Rumania, which had everything to do with the East Roman Empire, but it was geographically far away.

    The historical Rumania is the territory between the Balkan and Rhodope mountains south of Danube, limited by Trajan gate passage to the west, on the territories of contemporary Bulgaria, Turkey and Greece. This was the ancient name of the lands ruled by the Byzantines for a long time before the conqeest – and the Turkish called the whole part of their state Rum Milliet, as to distinguish between it and the Asia Minor lands, which were heavily colonised. The name stayed until the end of 19-th century – East Rumelia.

  12. Roman antiquity is not nearly as fake as this article.

    My theory on Fomenko is a Russian spy operation to feel out the boundary values of what is the most ridiculous text which is tractable in the enemy markets. Cary Cassidy’s seven alien races among us is a ballpark comparison. OK seven alien races among us is a bit more out there.

  13. The ruins of the Forum, Hadrian’s Wall, and many other Roman constructions in Western Europe are not mediaeval forgeries.

    Instead of trashing the entire history, it would be more valuable to ask what is left if the questionable documents are removed. Is every written account from classical Rome a forgery?

  14. My old professor of Latin must be turning in his grave!

    • Replies: @Really No Shit
  15. gT says:

    Looking forward to the next article.

  16. Instead of trashing the entire history, it would be more valuable to ask what is left if the questionable documents are removed. Is every written account from classical Rome a forgery?

    This is actually a fair point. Yes, it’s true there are not many papyri remaining from the days of the Roman Empire. Most of what we have are copies of copies made centuries after the fact. Perhaps when the technology advances enough that the carbonized scrolls from the vast library discovered in a villa near Herculaneum can be read we’ll have a better idea of how faithful or bowdlerized the copies of ancient texts that were transmitted by scribes really are. Even so there is certainly other evidence of Rome’s history: hoards of buried coins (from which we can obtain a sequence of rulers), structural remains like Hadrian’s Wall, etc.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
  17. @brabantian

    Good point on Marcus Aurelius. Regarding the Septuagint’s priority, that is a real possibility, though I haven’t found concluding evidence. The early histories of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are, almost by definition, complete fabrications.

    • Replies: @Gleimhart Mantooso
  18. @James N. Kennett

    The ruins of the Forum, Hadrian’s Wall, and many other Roman constructions in Western Europe are not mediaeval forgeries.

    Of course not. One does not “forge” a road, a wall, a Colosseum, etc.

    Is every written account from classical Rome a forgery?

    No. I don’t believe that either. Solution in the third article. Thanks for reading

    • Replies: @22pp22
  19. @Morton's toes

    I have read Fomenko, and he has raised a lot of good questions, but I do not follow his extreme Russo-centric theory, nor do I consider his statistical method reliable.

    • Replies: @jujubean
  20. Exile says:

    As much as I hate the thought of so much of the Roman and Greek history I admire being potentially faked, the extremely limited and sketchily corroborated sources for much of this history demands some healthy skepticism.

    How many times has one man “uncovered” so much history single-handedly without being proven a charlatan?

    Good on Ron for providing another alternative viewpoint. I’m not sold on this until I do a lot more independent reading and thinking but this doesn’t sound like obvious quackery at this point.

  21. Everything we know is wrong, eh?

    • Replies: @cyrusthevirus
  22. @Tom67

    On Cicero’s Republic: there was, from the start, much controversy over the authenticity of this palimpsest, including the way Angelo May deciphered it with chemicals, destroying it in the process.
    But if you bear with me until my third article, you will see that I do not, in fact, necessarily agree with Hochart and point to another solution, a chronological solution.

  23. @Malla

    That’s interesting, because, in my next article, I’ll get into the role of the Franks in creating the Roman papacy during the so-called Gregorian Reform, more or less the birth of Roman catholicism.

  24. @Steven80

    OK. In that case, my supposition that current Romania was roughly the region of the original founders of the Byzantine empire is groundless. (They were probably from Moesia, or somewhere in the Balkans, not far actually from where originated the earliest proto-Indo-European speech community, according to the Kurgan hypothesis). Does that invalidate my argument on Dacian and Latin? I admit this part is the weakest in my article, that’s why I put it last.
    I appreciate a good feedback like yours.

  25. Norbertus says:

    This article does not mention the source of all sources. That Rome was already the center of the Empire at the beginning of the christian calendar can easily be derived from Sacred Scripture. Just one exemple: Mt 16,18: “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”. Peter went to Rome and on his grave the Church was built. We of course all know that also Paul went to Rome where he was martyred. And there is much much more. Are we going to dispute the authenticity of the Sacred Scripture?

    Too bad that the name of the author (or authors) is not mentioned. I suspect he is to be situated in orthodox-caesaropapist circles.

  26. Many scholars believe that the ancestors of modern Romance speakers in what is now Romania probably migrated there from Illyria in the early Middle Ages. That would explain why Romanian is so close phonetically to Venetian and the now extinct Romance dialects of the Dalmatian coast. The native vocabulary of Romanian also suggests the original population were agrarian sheep herders, not soldiers. The migration theory explains the lack of Dacian as well. Grammatically Romanian is actually further from Latin than Spanish or Italian, both of which preserve a significant amount of Latin verb conjugations. The preservation of case in Romanian is probably explained by interference from Slavic. Prior to the re-latinization of Romanian in the 19th century, a movement driven by Western oriented intellectuals, Romanian (more accurately Wallachian and Moldavian) vocabulary was very Slavic influenced, more like 40-50% of common words.

    • Agree: JRB
    • Disagree: ariadna
  27. @J

    Yes, the author of this article seems to have missed your points. This work is a rambling mess. The author should take a course in writing before he attempts any more of this deception. This man has no real evidence of anything. Most histories are bit of myth, truth, and someone’s vision. This is mighty close to 1619 and other “Black Propaganda Pieces.”

    This is not a scholarly work but a ragtag attempt to nit pick certain questionable items to build an “alternative history.” Unfortunately, this type of stuff is now called scholarship at Universities. A couple years ago at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks a women was awarded a PhD in Indigenous Studies. Her thesis was that she proved their were horses in America prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Her resources were old Indian lore and even Ancient Aliens! She had no scientific proof.

    If I remember correctly horses died out in the Eocene in the New World. Scientists laughed their asses off but it’s not funny because one only needs to look around you to see the complete collapse of science and other disciplines under the New World Order of the Neo Marxists BLM.

  28. 22pp22 says:

    I enjoyed this article until the end and then felt the most enormous sense of deflation.

    • Agree: Old and Grumpy
  29. 22pp22 says:
    @Tom67

    Great post. I felt the same way.

    • Agree: Julian of Norwich
  30. 22pp22 says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Limba română este vorbită în toată lumea de 28 de milioane de persoane, dintre care cca. 24 de milioane o au ca limbă maternă.[2] Din numărul total de vorbitori, peste 17 milioane[3] se află în România, unde româna (dialectul dacoromân) este limbă oficială și, conform recensământului populației din 2011, este limbă maternă pentru peste 90% din populație. Limba română este una dintre cele șase limbi oficiale ale Provinciei Autonome Voivodina (Serbia). De asemenea este limbă oficială sau administrativă în câteva comunități și organizații internaționale, precum Uniunea Latină sau Uniunea Europeană (de la 1 ianuarie 2007).

    A chunk of Romanian taken from Wikipedia. If you know French and Spanish, it is easy to understand and is no more like Latin than any other Romance language. It is not Vulgar Latin any more than modern Portuguese is. Modern Italian contains a lot of quite charming colloquialisms from Late Latin. My favourite is testa meaning head which derives from the Latin word for jug. Capus, the original word, survived in expressions like capital. The supposed Vulgar Latin of Romania does not use the slang word testa, but the formal word cap.

    The only things that is different about Romanian are:

    1). The limited survival of case-endings in nouns. The earliest French texts preserve limited case endings as well.
    2). The placing of the definite article after the noun. The ‘ul’s is the text above are form the Latin ille and give us le/la/les in French etc.

    Lots of languages do this including Bulgarian and Norwegian.

  31. @Malla

    Al-Biruni was well versed in physics, mathematics, astronomy, and natural sciences, and also distinguished himself as a historian, chronologist and linguist

    Probably a fake person.

  32. 22pp22 says:

    “The conundrum only thickens when we compare Roman and Byzantine cultures. According to the translatio imperii paradigm, the Eastern Roman Empire is the continuation of the Western Roman Empire. But Byzantium scholars insist on the great differences between the Greek-speaking Byzantine civilization and the earlier civilization of the Latium.”

    This is not news. Greek was never displaced as the language of the east. The Gospels were written in Greek. They still refer to a Roman world.

    Latin was, however, the legal language of the early Byzantine Empire. Justinian had his codes composed in it. As the Latin language declined in the East, the codes were translated into Greek.

    The early barbarian kings, who saw themselves as heirs to Rome, submitted disputes for arbitration in Constantinople.

    The Latin influence was already declining in the late Empire. Septimius Severus was from North Africa. Many of the later emperors were form the Balkans.

    Michael Psellos wrote centuries after the fall of the Western Empire. Those closer to the actual time of Constantine were aware of the links between Constantinople and Rome. Constans is a Latin word; Polis is Greek.

    I like the section about Tacitus. The rest is easy to attack. It was nice to get emotional about something other than politics.

    • Agree: Julian of Norwich
  33. @James N. Kennett

    Hadrian’s Wall, and many other Roman constructions in Western Europe are not mediaeval forgeries

    Yes. The Roman’s were the only people who could or would build stone walls, so any stone wall is therefore built by classical Romans.
    Note the Classical Roman architecture of Hadrians wall:

    Barbarians storming Hadrians wall with their siege engines:

  34. @Exalted Cyclops

    hoards of buried coins

    Ancient coins are fake and gay.

    “Fairy Tales for the Penguins” [about coins, not penguins]

  35. @Norbertus

    Peter went to Rome and on his grave the Church was built.

    Wouldn’t it make more sense logically to found the Church in Jerusalem? Yeshua was the Mashiach of the Jews, after all.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @ploni almoni
  36. @niteranger

    Her thesis was that she proved their were horses in America prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Her resources were old Indian lore

    What? You don’t believe the stories of old Indian lore are factual history? You think the stories were made up? You want scientific proof? Take your meds, revisionist.

  37. Daniel H says:
    @22pp22

    Fascinating. I have a few semesters of college Portuguese instruction and years of on/off conversation with Brazilian acquaintances and I can understand, quite well, the above Romanian passage. It seems clear to me that all the Romance languages derive from a stripped down, universally spoken, utilitarian latin that was even more streamlined than written Vulgar.

    • Replies: @22pp22
  38. Alden says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Rome was the major city and capital of an Empire. Jerusalem was an insignificant town in a colony beset by rebellions during the first 200 years of Christianity. It would be natural for the apostles ( if they existed) to head for Rome and other important places. From the camps of 400AD tribal leaders in N Europe to Japan in the 15 1600s Christian missionaries always seemed to focus on the elites in their capitals and headquarters.

    Fascinating article.

  39. Seraphim says:
    @Deplorable Dissident

    This seems to be just the Vorspiel, preparing the ground. Probably it will introduce him in the second installment and in the last we’ll have the ‘confirmation’ of Fomenko’s ‘good questions’. We’ll see.

    • Agree: ivan
  40. This is irresponsible Jewish hogwash.

    • Replies: @Blaque Knee
  41. Is Plutarch’s lives also a fake? He lived much closer to the events he described and why should we disbelieve him or are you telling me that the 1st French translation of his work in the 15th century was a forgery.

  42. There is also a Capitol Hill in Washington State, and there is a Capitol Hill in Washington D.C. !

    Were the founding fathers in Washington State and we were lied to in school? They both speak English, and both think that they are in control of America!

    Right Coast Left Coast!

  43. FB says: • Website

    Excellent article…

    Finally some decent material on this website…

    So ‘Western Civilization’ is basically a facade of bullshit…?…all cobbled together by enterprising little Humps in the fifteenth century…?

    Why do I find this quite believable and eminently logical…?

    I remember having to read Plutarch as part of ‘humanities’ electives…and being none too impressed…

    Archeology and genetics have done massively serious work in the last few decades that already makes this ‘antiquity’ stuff as believable as Adam and Eve…

  44. Nothing shocks me anymore. We have been lied to about so many things, why not this one also?

    The moon landings were a hoax. Only boomers take that fairytale seriously. Some guys got inside a giant pencil and it took them to the moon. Then they landed on the moon in an aluminum milk carton, then they played some golf, live streamed it back to earth in colour, I mean black and white, then they got back to their orbiting pencil rocket, and came back to earth. And all this was done on the computing power of a digital watch, but no one can do this anymore because someone at NASA lost the original tapes in grandpa’s attic. Lmfao.

    Nuclear weapons are a massive hoax. Photos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki back then look identical to photos of firebombed Tokyo complete with intact bridges, stone buildings, and undamaged sewage systems, (even at “ground zero”), precisely because Hiroshima and Nagasaki were firebombed like Tokyo. And exactly the way the original (not the faked) eye witness accounts describe it. Furthermore there exists endless cutting room floor footage that comically demonstrates just how doctored and fake all the test footage of mushroom clouds are. Not to mention the footage of US Army engineers out in the desert constructing massive TNT towers (aka “atomic bombs”) lmfao.

    Everything these snakes tell you is a massive lie. Especially the clownvirus psyops role playing make believe we are all unfortunately enduring right now. It’s really cringey. These (((people))) really hate God, and anyone who follows God

    I really cannot wait for the day that God incarnates himself into the material plane precisely to punish and exterminate these snakes and their followers, precisely how it is described in more than one religious text. And I’m not talking about (((the holy bible))).

  45. Not Raul says:

    An interesting document with a controversial history is the Peutinger Map.

    Mainstream historians believe that it was created during the Roman Empire, possibly in the 4th or 5th Century.

    However, Emily Albu makes a convincing case that the map was created almost a thousand years later:

    Until Albu framed her investigation, no one had focused as keenly on the medieval artifact, its deep historical context, and the actual circumstances of its production. Her argument justifies her main hypothesis, which is that at the end of the long 12th century (ca. 1050-ca. 1229) the Peutinger map was produced from a centuries-old Carolingian tradition of secular mapping and appeared during the then-current Hohenstaufen rivalry with the papacy. The artifact is, then, a late product of the so-called 12 th century renaissance, and the evidence leads her “to assign the map’s production to agents or friends of the Hohenstaufen court, within a decade or two following the Fourth Crusade” of 1202-04 (72), perhaps as late as 1220 “when Pope Honorius III (1216-27), successor to Innocent III, crowned Frederick [II] emperor of the Romans in Rome itself” (115). The map belongs to Hohenstaufen propaganda and “stirs a memory of the ancient Roman Empire, whose magnificence and might the German Roman emperors invoked and envisioned as theirs to hold again” (122).

    https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2015/2015.08.33/

    The map is an interesting example of an artifact that is generally considered Roman; but probably isn’t. The document seems to have been created as propaganda.

    • Thanks: FB
  46. FatR says:

    Ahh, another historical revisionist, with all the usual baggage, such as arbitrarily assuming certain pieces of knowledge he likes (like identities and very names of Pagan gods) to be absolutely trustworthy, and simplifying exhaustive discussions covering many volumes of arguments and counter-arguments to “traditional historians blindly believe in whatever I don’t like”. Stopped reading at the point where he assumed Voltaire, of all the people, to be an authority on anything.

  47. Alfred says:

    It reminds me of “Hitler’s Diaries”

    Twenty-five years ago German reporter Gerd Heinemann stunned the world – and, especially, Rupert Murdoch – by claiming he had unearthed Hitler’s diaries. They turned out to be sophisticated fakes that severely embarrassed the Sunday Times, because it ran six pages of the “world exclusive” on April 24 1983 before the truth of the forgery was discovered.

    It emerged that Konrad Kujau, an antiques dealer and painter, had faked 60 volumes of diaries. Heidemann, unaware of that fact, negotiated their sale to Germany’s Stern magazine for £2.5m. In his turn, Murdoch – in company with Newsweek magazine – agreed to pay about £600,000 for the serial rights.

    Meanwhile, Heidemann had been creaming off money from Stern by inflating the sums requested by Kujau. So, after the forgery was revealed, he was convicted of fraud and, like Kujau, was sentenced to four years eight months in jail. But what has happened since to Heidemann since?

    25 years ago today… the Sunday Times published Hitler’s diaries (2008)

    I can’t help wondering how much of the Chinese porcelain that is fetching amazing prices is genuine. It is impossible to date the stuff and China has plenty of smart craftsmen.

    Chinese Ru-ware bowl sets $38m auction record in Hong Kong (2017)

    • Replies: @anonymous
  48. Biff says:

    History-writing is a political act,

    And a lucrative act.

  49. Thanks for this wonderful article! I agree with your remarks in the Comments on Fomenko: too far-fetched and simplistic. Typically the work of a scientist, not a scholar (for not taking into account the trivium).

    As for your observation on the absence of medieval remains in Rome, you are right. I suppose you are familiar with the work by Heribert Illig (e.g. Wer hat an der Uhr gedreht?), who convincingly argued that three centuries of history, from 614 to 911 AD, were invented. Thus the “historical” figure of Charlemagne would be entirely ficticious. This feat of invention was supposedly accomplished by scribes at the court of Otto III, whose mother was from Byzantium.

  50. Franz says:
    @22pp22

    Hadrian’s Wall is still there and the original letters written by the families of the men who garrisoned it have been preserved in the mud.

    Ah, you beat me to it.

    The Sarmation mercenaries Marcus Aurelius conquered then used as protectors of the Northern Britain is independently corroborated.

    The Sarmations often fought for and against the Persians, who made records. Perhaps they Persians were a bit happy that Rome took a load off their hands, anyway part of it. But it made the Persian records and they agree with Western Roman history.

    It seems at least some of the tactics and horsemanship imparted by the Sarmation cavalry were incorporated by the locals. Their actual number is small; likely as not they married in and became indistinguishable from other Britons. Whether they were actually at Hadrian’s Wall or not is a bit of a puzzle. Their tactics favored hit/run, create ambuscades, and so on. The wall would have crimped their style. A terrible movie in 2004 connected them to King Arthur (the title of the movie). This is pseudo history at it’s loopiest. And the movie has no clue how steppe riders actually fought.

    The nearest modern-day people to the Sarmatians are in Ossetia. Most of them have always looked similar to Western Europeans to me. Their biggest tribe, the Alans, also settled in the west.

    • Replies: @Lurker
    , @R.G. Camara
  51. If Tacitus’ Annals were a forgery you’d think that the forgers would at least put Glowing descriptions of the Christians in Tacitus’ works especially since the main buyer of these works was the pope but we have a very negative description of the Christians in the Annals, an ‘abomination’ is what Tacitus calls them and can barely muster any sympathy for the the horrific treatment meted out to them by Nero. I think they are dismissed in 2 paragraphs in the Annals.

    The way i understood this thread was whether Tacitus (his works) are a fabrication/forgery of the 15th century or not; And if 3 (Christian) scholars of the 3rd and 5th century knew of Tacitus and mention him and quote him than that says it all

    That would be Tertullian, Jerome & Orosius

    https://historum.com/threads/voltaire-on-tacitus-is-tacitus-a-forgery.71755/page-2

    Another point is that what Tacitus recorded in Ann. XI/XXIV was also discovered on a Bronze tablet near Lyon in 1525; Making it equally impossible for Poggio to forge something found 60 years after his death and which stems from the 1st century AD;

  52. Caesar was real come on guys read the adventures of those indomitable Gauls Asterix and Obelix.

    • LOL: Inquiring Mind
  53. Reading the feedback so far, I realize that most objections are about my tentative theory on the origin of Latin (inspired by M. J. Harper). Since I am no Latinist, I should perhaps have avoided bringing this linguistic issue, because it is not essential to the global picture I am heading towards. So I appreciate the objections, but I think there is still a big enigma about Latin’s origin, and obviously the standard explanation of why the Romanians speak Romanian (they learned it from Roman soldiers’ Vulgar Latin) makes no sense at all. So some alternative explanation is needed.

    • Replies: @ariadna
    , @Virgil S
  54. I’m trying to get an Agrippa on this…is nothing Aurelius?

    We’ll soon see the Italians on their Nero in supplication before CHM (Celtic History Matters).

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  55. @Norbertus

    “Sacred Scripture” is a particularly untrustworthy source. “Peter went to Rome and on his grave the Church was built” is one of the pillar of our fake history (from Irenaeus and Eusebius, mostly), the other one being Constantine’s Donation.
    My next article will deal with Church history, and perhaps I should have started with that one. I expect it will raise less objections, because the notion that Western Church history is a complete fabrication of the schismatic Gregorian Reformers is now almost mainstream, especially among Byzantine scholars.

  56. Alba - says:

    Regarding the foundation of rome and that the history of romulus and remo being a forgery representing the 4 cruzaders or the escision of roman empire is completely wrong

    The myths of the divine twin brothers is much older and ultimely came from Indo-European myths that shaped Roman, Celtic, Germanic Hindu ….identities

    》At the dawn of times were two twin brothers, Manu and Yemo, travelling with a sacred cow. The twins decided to create a new world for a new race called ‘mankind’. In order to achieve this, Yemo had to be sacrificed and carved up by his brother, with the help of the Sky Gods, to produce mankind. Manu created the earth, water, air and fire, and became the first priest of the new world order.

    All Indo-European speakers (Germanic, Celts, Romans, Greeks, Hittites, Iranians, Hindus) developed their own version of this foundation myth, derived from a shared ancestry.

    -Manu, the progenitor of mankind, was also the very first king to rule this earth. the Hindu Manu is known in Germanic mythology as Mannus

    -The Roman foundation myth, the story of Romulus and Remus, is another variant of the Indo-European creation myth. Mannus would be Romulus (Romanus ), killing his twin brother Remus (Yemo, or Iemus in Latin) to create Rome. The legend was made up centuries after the actual foundation of Rome, as the names of Mannus and Iemus adapted to the phonology of the city (hence the Ro- and Re- prefix).

    But not only it represent that founding myth but the she wolf feeding the founders of what will became rome is identical to other indo european foundationsl myths like the wussuns an indoeuropean tribe living in xingiang today china .

    》Nandoumi’s infant son Liejiaomi was left in the wild. He was miraculously saved from hunger being suckled by a she-wolf; wussun foundational myth dating 176ac recorded by chinese historians.

    The Wusun ancestor myth shares striking similarities with those of the Hittites, the Scythians, the Romans, the , Turks ( throw ashina royal family )…..and represent an unmistakable indo european influence

    Meanwhile “a stele from Bologna, dated to between 350-400 BC, depicts an animal, possibly a wolf, nursing a single infant. By 269 BC, the silver didrachm is the earliest depiction of the complete icon, with the characteristic “turning of the she-wolf’s head” backward and downward at the twins”.

    https://ibb.co/t3NKNZJ

    So its literally imposible that she wolf and twin brother history were derived from the division of western and eastern rome or the even the more ridiculous asuntion of the 4 cruzade simbolism when the roman founding myths is in sintony with the rest of indo european founding myths spread across eurasia as far as china and that took place like is the case of wussuns before the partition of rome and of course the cruzades.

    • Thanks: SolontoCroesus
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  57. By far the worst piece of writing on Classical Antiquity and the early Mediaeval Period that it has ever been my misfortune to read. Worse even than the politically correct revisions of history emerging from the woke academy, which is perhaps where the author is located.

    Readers should note that the thesis attempts to discredit our existing understanding of European history during a millenium that shaped existing law, culture, morals and political institutions. It has the effect of debasing and delegitimising that history and the societies that sprang from it. Perhaps that is the intention, rather than offering a genuine contribution to scholarship on the subject.

    For the thesis to be correct, we would have to accept that the forgers were all literary geniuses, capable of consistently fabricating authors and sources with vastly differing literary styles, personal histories and political perspectives. It also requires all of the corroborating historical evidence from multiple sources, concerning the existence of these authors and the events they describe, to have been cumulatively fabricated.

  58. Alba - says:

    And david anthony the most prestigious proffesor of indo european history share the same opinion

    writing for harvard magacine

    》》》According to studies of IndoEuropean mythology, young Yamnaya men would go off in warlike groups, raping and pillaging for a few years, then return to their village and settle down into respectability as adults. Those cults were mythologically associated with wolves and dogs, like youths forming wild hunting packs, and the youths are said to have worn dog or wolf skins during their initiation . He says it’s easy to imagine groups sacrificing and consuming the animals as a way to symbolically become wolves or dogs themselves. Anthony says that all this offers solid archaeological evidence for the youthful “wolf packs” of Indo-European legends – and sees a link to the myth of the foundation of Rome. “You’ve got two boys, Romulus and Remus, and a wolf that more or less gives birth to them,” he says. “And the earliest legends of the foundation of Rome are connected with a large group of homeless young men who were given shelter by Romulus. But they then wanted wives, so they invited in a neighbouring tribe and stole all their women. You can see that whole set of early legends as being connected possibly with the foundation of Rome by youthful war bands.”

    http://genetics.med.harvard.edu/reichlab/Reich_Lab/Press_files/NewScientist.pdf

    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  59. LOL so this is what all these useless colleges are pumping out now. Propagandists and degenerates.

  60. Yung Jung says:

    I dont know about this whole thing but on Caesar being a sun God the killing of him goes hand in hand with many such myths, as Osiris, Baldr, Chiram Abiff, Jesus etc

  61. Plutarch is an important source I gather on Roman history. I cannot comment on that other than to note that his work on Isis and Osiris proved that this was indeed from antiquity for when hieroglyphs were first deciphered in the early 19th century they verified much of what he had descibed in his book.

  62. Sounds like he’s proposing to knock off centuries if not a thousand years from History. Wow! BUT, that cannot be because of astrology charts from antiquity. There are quite a few of them from say one or two centuries BC and AD. They give say five planets each with zodiac degrees. Modern computer programs reconstruct these using fixed, immutable planetary orbit periods. So there is only one possible time and date for a given set of zodiac positions of the planets. And, that is then checked against the date which is given on the horoscope. There is a very slight adjustment due to change in Earth’s rotation rate – may be an hour or two, but that’s it! You can’t knock off centuries I’m afraid.

  63. 22pp22 says:
    @Daniel H

    We don’t have any sources written in what we could call pure Vulgar Latin.

    What we do have are inscriptions, graffiti and the errors made by the less well-educated among the Late Roman authors.

    The main differences between early Romance and Late Latin are easy to explain.

    1). The loss of final consonants especially m, s and t. This played havoc with the case endings of Latin nouns.

    The declension of dominus (master) is dominus, dominum, domini, domino, domino, domini, dominos, dominorum, dominis, dominis.

    If you remove the final consonants, most of the distinctions are lost and the case system becomes pointless.

    We find examples of this as early as the Pompeian graffiti.

    “Quisquis ama ualea, perea qui nosci amare” should be Quisquis amat ualeat, pereat qui nescit amare.

    2). Latin has an odd way of reporting speech. It is called the accusative and infinitive. You don’t say, “I said that I was true.” You say, “I said it to be true.” “He thought himself to be very unhappy.”

    The use of ‘that’ (quod) appears fairly early and displaces the accusative and infinitive.

    3). The main verb migrated to the front of the sentence during the long course of Roman history. The use of case endings means that the position of words becomes all important in the sentence and has to be fixed. The verb can no longer float around.

    4). The loss of most forms for the passive. Amabo means I will love. Amabor means I will be loved. In the past tense Latin used a passive form amatus est consisting of the supine and the verb ‘to be.’ The verb ‘to be’ started being used in all the tenses and displaces the other passive forms. Thus you have the modern Spanish, Italian and Portuguese passive forms.

    Make these changes and Hey Presto, Late Latin turns into early Romance. No need for an invasion from Dacia.

    • Agree: Daniel H, Alden
    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @orionyx
  64. 22pp22 says:
    @22pp22

    PS I am awarding myself a Magna cum Laude for that succinct description of early Romance linguistics. In Early Latin the a in magna would have been long, in Late Latin and especially in North Africa, it would have been short.

  65. Alba - says:

    A little bit off topic but now that we have started with indo european and wolf /dog simbolism and founding myth lets make a last steep further and clarify the foundation of the turkic ethno cultural genesis to understand the importance the wolf /dog had for indoeuropean tribes and their descendants

    The royal family and founder of the gokturk empire were the ashina tribe and were of wussun and saka origin an indo european tribe.

    1-The founding myth

    is nearly identicall to the wussuns( and other indo european tribes)
    Wolf Tale : Ashina was one of ten sons born to a grey she-wolf (see: Asena) in the north of Gaochang

    2- funerary rite

    It is certain that the rite of cremation was adopted among Turkic Hagan and a very narrow ruling stratum of kaganates. Rite of cremation did not spread among the common people of Turkic. This may well be at the origin of the other ethnic groups of the ruling family.

    Almost all of the elements of the funeral rites of the Ashina have analogues in the Indo-European rites, in particular the Slavic rites. About individual incision, Al-Bakr can be quoted: “Wives of the same dead cut their hands and faces with knives.” Chinese source said that on the day of the funeral, as well as in the day of his death, family used to ride horses. There is likely to have in mind something like a Slavic funeral feast. “The building was built on the grave” is an analogue of the Slavic Domowina.

    3- genetics

    the Ashina clan belongs to the Z93, Z94+, Z2123-, Y2632- branch of haplogroup R1a the same as other indo european tribes of the steppe

    4- etymology
    Ashina is an indoeuropean word . An explicit semantic calque suggests knowledge of its original meaning and foreign origin, which is compatible with the multi-ethnic, multi-cultural nature of the First Turkic khanate.

    The name “Ashina” was recorded in ancient Arab chronicles in these forms: Aś(i)nas (al-Tabari), Ānsa (Hudud al-‘Alam), Śaba (Ibn Khordadbeh), Śana, Śaya (Al-Masudi).[41][42] The name “Ashina” is translated by some researchers as “WOLF “,

    When Ashina became the head of Göktürks, they exhibited a banner with a WOLF head over their gate, in reminiscence of its origins.

    Flag of the gokturk empire

    https://ibb.co/mRbQgwT

    And the journey doent end here after gokturks conquered nearly all steppe they end up influencing mongols too .

    https://ibb.co/zPx0B3K

    The honorific KHAN term used by the maximun authorities of the turks and mongols ultimely came from wolf/ dog nearly identical to others terms for wolf/ dogs in other indo european languages like can in latin .

    Even today anatolian turks simbolic animal is the wolf

    https://ibb.co/rsvzKpc

    Soo we wuzz literally KHANGS (wolfs) and sheeeet

    • Replies: @Alden
  66. The author raises some interesting points. It would be useful to apply modern technology to determine the authenticity of the MS in question. It would be a simple matter to determine the age of the vellum, the chemical composition of the ink, and so forth.

    One must not overlook the vast numismatic legacy of the Roman world in determining the historicity of events. The coinage provided the regime with a vast public relations propaganda medium, not unlike newspapers today. Every military campaign is recorded from Profectio to Victoria and Pax Fundata. New laws are celebrated, imperial largesses commemorated, new temples and public buildings consecrated, vanquished enemies depicted in shackles, the list goes on and on. Many coins also bear the precise dates of the emperor’s annual renewal of the Tribunican Power, Consulship, Imperator, and so on, allowing them to be placed in correct chronological sequence.

    The existence even today of millions of coins with the portraits of Julius Caesar, Constantine, Marcus Aurelius, and the rest of the rogues’ gallery of rulers, provides ample evidence of the historicity of these individuals.

    Constantine’s power base, just to keep the record straight, was Trier, on the Germany border, not his birthplace. He is also intimately connected to Britain, where his father died, and where he fled after the failure of his first attempt to seize power. When his forces finally marched on Rome five years later, he came as an illegitimate pretender, just as was his opponent Maxentius, oddly enough. Incidentally Maxentius issued an Edict of Tolerance of Christians in 311, a year before Constantine did, and he was building a Christian basilica in Rome which Constantine completed and claimed as his own. And there is not a single Christian symbol on Constantine’s triumphal arch, still standing next to the Coliseum, which is instead festooned with traditional Roman deities and personifications.

    The imperial shift to the east began with Trajan’s conquests there, two centuries before Constantine, and proceeded organically as the vast mineral and agricultural resources of the area were further exploited. Europe was well on its way to becoming a stagnant provincial backwater, which it remained until the Norman Conquest of England, when the vitality of the strong northern nations finally rejuvenated the ancient tribal lands.

  67. Hodd says:

    Wonderful irrelevant balderdash. Utter Cod’s Wallop. Latter day BLM statue smashing. What fun!

    Modern day historical jiggery pokery. Next he’s going to claim the Oera Linda is a forgery and the Frisians didn’t found Athens…

    This writer has been reading too much Harry Potter, too much The Hobbit and too much Isaac Asimov. Next thing he’s going to tell us Nero was a telepathic person of reduced growth!

    Always wondered what idiots did with their time. They write drivel like this. Think Unz needs to go in to retirement. It must have been his degree in knitting that did it!

    Can’t wait for the next part of this fairie story.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  68. @Tom67

    “It has very strong Germanic influence and it is very easy to demonstrate the fact that it is the furthest from classical Latin and also least resembles the other Romanic languages.“

    Interesting. I was always under the impression that the peculiarities of French stemmed from the influence of the Celtic/Gaulish languages on the Vulgar Latin spoken in the region.

  69. I find it fairly plausible that Romania/Dacia was the origin of Vulgar Latin. On the Indo-European language tree, Latin and Celtic are very close to each other (much more than say, Celtic and Teutonic). And it is well established that the Celtic people originated in Central Europe. Likewise, a group of “Romans” likely migrated from Dacia to Italy, eventually overtaking the original Etruscan inhabitants (who spoke a non-Indo-European language), and founding the city of Rome.

    • Replies: @22pp22
    , @JRB
  70. @Malla

    The great Persian Scholar Al Biruni believed that the Romans were originally Franks (Firangis, Farangs) which could mean Gaul + Germania? …

    “The Romans have, regarding this question, the following tradition: — Romulus and Romamis (3),
    the two brothers from the country of the Franks, on having ascended the throne, built the city of Rome. Then Romulus killed his brother, and the consequence was a long succession of intestine troubles and wars. “

    I’m not sure when the custom began exactly, but for a long time now, words like ‘Farang’ and ‘Ferengi’ in most parts of Asia (including the Middle East) have simply meant White (Christian) people generally, not just the historic Franks, although that’s where these words originated. In other words, there is the possibility that when Al Biruni writes of “the country of the Franks”, he’s simply referring to Europe or the West in general, and not France specifically.

    • Replies: @Malla
  71. Paul2090 says:
    @Observator

    One thing left out of many if not most of the histories of the empire is basic trade and economics. Oktavian’s contribution to Empire was taking Egypt from Marc Antony. This gave Rome the Red sea and the silk road trade. Rome paid for 1/4 to 1/3 of its military budget from Egyptian tribute.

    To say Imperial Rome was a forgery is to ignore the metals mines in Gail and in Brattania. It’s likely, as you said, that the move east was economic. Not only did Rome make $$$ in the silk trade, silk was a currency in the east. Constantine’s move east was probably more predicated on the silk trade as well as being closer to the grain fields in Crimea than anything else. By 300 AD the mines of Gaul were on the downslide. The city of Rome had no strategic advantage. Since Constantine didn’t live there, he had no reason to defend it.

    The author’s that culture is Greek rather than Roman is silly. Greek is older. Of course it’s the origin. That said,. much Roman history is collaborated by sources outside Rome. Eg the Bible as well as Chinese history and the wars against the Parthians.

  72. @First Millennium Revisionist

    Well, thank you for confirming (from outside the ark) that it will be up to the few remaining Christians to preserve not only the true faith but the true knowledge of history as well. In an age when the critical theory attacks everything about society and nature, it was omly a matter of time until it threw history also into its gaping maw, with articles like this one doing the same hatchet job to history like what BLM is currently doing to statuary. I suppose in five more years, George Washington will not have existed either.

    In order for lies to live, everything else must die. History, containing a record of thoughts and deeds which however one adjudges them are certainly weighty, is far too sane and sober a thing for our benighted times. “There is no reality, there is only me and my fantasy!” is the cry of every hubristic and hellbound wretch.

    • Agree: Seraphim, ariadna
    • Thanks: Neoconned
    • LOL: Grahamsno(G64)
    • Replies: @Alden
  73. @Norbertus

    I suspect he is to be situated in orthodox-caesaropapist circles.

    Ha, ha! Funny you should mention that. I myself was actually suspecting that ‘First Millennium Revisionist’ was really The Saker under a pseudonum … until I read his reply to your comment:

    “Sacred Scripture” is a particularly untrustworthy source.

    That definitely can’t be The Saker. He’s far too religious for that.

    • Replies: @Norbertus
  74. runeulv says:

    That the ancient world is missdated or faked, is hard to grasp at first, since it runs counter to all we know, but once the doubt is there, it soon become obvious for most that look for more proof.

    I decided to look into the history of shipping as a test, but any area of technology will give the same result if the chronology is wrong: That the ancient world start with the technology Europe possessed a thousand years ago, but that they miss the primitive stages of the evolutionary ladder that we find in northern/central Europe is very strange if the chronology is correct.

    With ships, all the evolutionary stages from the log boat to the galley is missing, and with horses, the stages where the horses gradually got big enough for an armored knight to ride it, is missing too.

    If we look at the language of shipping, most of the words for primitive parts are Norse, like keel, rudder, mast, north, south, starboard, etc, before they become Dutch and then the loanwords become English.

    Relevant here, is the frame of reference, since you need many on a ship that you don’t really need on land.
    1. East, west, north and south in relation to the earth
    2. Starboard, port, aft and bow in relation to the ship
    3. Right left back and front in relation to the person

  75. 22pp22 says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    Italy contained a lot of languages closely related to Latin, which have been preserved in a few scattered texts. These include Oscan and Umbrian. These were not mere dialects, but languages in their own right. This implies that the Italic branch of the the Indo-European language family had been in Italy long enough to evolve into a series of quite different forms.

  76. GMC says:

    Very interesting so far . I often thought that Constantinople was a very important city , when it came to the history that links the East, the North with the West . I’ve only read some parts about southern Russia and Constantinople in 9th century and beyond – De Administrando Imperio- 945-959 by Konstantin VII – I believe it was written for his son’s education about the territories and the people in those areas , as Pechenegs, Khazars, etc. Also a Persian geographer named Hudud al Alam and his accounts. Maybe , we will hear about them – next . Spacibo

    • Replies: @runeulv
  77. johnm33 says:

    Since some scholars have accounted for every known structure in Rome having a ‘documented’ use prior to 236 there’s much to doubt. There’s an alternative account of Constantines origins that has his mother a native of west ‘Wales’, and a legend that after she secured the true cross from Jerusalem she toured her province with it, a relic of which are all the place names thereabouts with cross in them, these being the sites where an overnight stay occured. Hiensohn is still after many years looking for a European site where a continuous archealogical record exists connecting the Roman and medieval periods, each one appears to have at best a simple layer of mud, and worse a near 700 year gap during which nothing was produced and then a resumption of old ‘local’ tech but at a more primitive level. If there are 700 years missing/added that would almost make the two prophets contemporaries what price seniority? If Rome collapsed in 236/936 that would suggest the sacking of Rome by the Gauls may have been it’s demise, and if those Gauls were a combined force of french/british tribes together with some german/scandinavian tribes as in the holinshead projects tale of Brennius and Belinus then we may have some skeletal remains of the truth.
    I’m a real sceptic when it comes to ‘narrative’ history, even more so than msm ‘news’ and find nothing in the post too challenging to admit to my spread of historical jig-saw pieces.
    Upstream someone mentioned the lack of evidence for the jews in egypt, and yet D. Rohl discovered Solomons palace in avaris over 20 years ago, how is that not evidence? do you suppose he commuted?

    • Replies: @UncommonGround
  78. 22pp22 says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    No, both in terms of phonetics and vocabulary Frankish was more influential.

    Words beginning with g are very often of Frankish origin including the words for war and warden (guerre and guardien). Guardian was later adopted into English from Norman French. So we have two words from the same root. Also garenne which is cognate with warren in English.

    There are very few words of Celtic origin in either English or French – goeland (seagull) is one of the few that survives in both languages.

    • Replies: @runeulv
    , @Philip Owen
  79. A 3 part series to tell us that history is BS?

    Any thinking person already knows that. History is generally written by the winner in some brutal conflict. The losers take on things, if mentioned at all, is minimized into insignificance. Why would anyone trust history as a guide to what actually happened?

    History, Archaeology, Paleontology, Anthropology, etc, etc, etc are all just BS artists making up a story as they go along. They have no actual proof for much of what they claim, just their interpretations to spin a good yarn that sounds interesting and gets them funding.

    These professions, and many others, are the modern form of the court jesters of old. They just make stuff up that sounds plausible relying on their fellow story tellers to provide a phony basis upon which they build another level of BS.

    What we should be doing is getting rid of these professions as a whole. If you can’t absolutely prove what you say, you should be considered a BS artist and shunned. If that were the rule, the entire economics profession along with their banking schemes would disappear. Just look at the damage Economics has done because people actually took their BS seriously.

  80. KANGZ says:

    WE WUZ ROME AND SHIIIIET

  81. @Tom67

    It is simply not true that all the Romanic languages resemble each other more that than any one of them resembles Latin. All one needs is to take French, Italian and Latin.

    If you speak one West Romanic language you can learn the others very easily, or even understand them without having to learn anything. I don’t think that it takes more than a few weeks to learn French if you speak Spanish (or the other way arround). But learning Latin may take a long time, maybe years whether you start from Spanish or from French.

    By the way, a very interesting article. I’ll wait for the other parts of it. Does Epiktet fits well in this history? He was brought as a slave to Rom.

    • Replies: @Tom67
  82. ariadna says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    “Since I am no Latinist, I should perhaps have avoided bringing this linguistic issue, because it is not essential to the global picture I am heading towards.”

    You are right. You should have, yet you devoted quite a bit of space to it. Dare I say you don’t impress me as much of a historian either. Nevertheless, your zeal in advancing the notion that the Western civilization is built upon the mythical existence of a fake Roman culture did impress me. (What motivates you, where you were “heading towards,” is an interesting question.)
    More about your preposterous statements about Dacia/Romania/Romanian language later.

  83. You have to wonder why any Christian would forge Lucretius’ De rerum natura. That book offers such a radical alternative to the Christian world view that I seriously doubt a Christian in the Renaissance could have made himself generate such thoughts at the time.

    • Replies: @LankyTunes
  84. Constantine decided to move the heart of the Empire closer to its most endangered borders. Does that make any sense?

    It made sense to Edward Gibbon.

    It also makes sense to modern Greeks, who even today still casually refer to themselves as Romiou.

    Nothing is more likely than that a substantial fraction of accepted classical history is factually incorrect. After all, that was a long time ago. However, as your own list of sources suggests, your question is a question serious historians have been asking, and researching, since the days of Barthold Georg Niebuhr two centuries ago. Even Gibbon, who (as you know) predated Niebuhr, was rather alert for historical fraud.

    I notice that your article hardly mentions inscriptions, medals or ruins, and is not very curious about coins. Its airy dismissal of Justinian law might surprise some European jurists of the past thousand years. If it is suggested that Justinian’s forger invented or fraudulently compiled a comprehensive, balanced system of law, with all the marks of experience and long use, this is an extraordinary claim. Could be true for all I know, though I doubt it, but it wants more evidence.

    For a thousand years, after all, the classical Romans had a legal system of some kind. I am unaware of evidence that Justinian’s account of it were incompatible with what we know of Roman institutions. Are you aware of such?

    Hochart researches forgeries, as you say. This could be useful research, but conclusions based on one man’s work in one area can only be taken so far. Hochart, after all, has an interest in the matter, too.

    Your sources are skeptics. Very well. More skepticism of the skeptics is warranted.

  85. I guess the Jesus mythicists don’t sound so crazy now, do they? The Gospels certainly don’t make sense in a lot of ways, like the rush to crucify Jesus on a Friday afternoon, when Jewish superstitions about the sabbath didn’t bind the Romans, and they ran the territory. Even if the Romans had to go along with these taboos for political reasons, they faced no urgency to execute Jesus on the cross right away; they simply could have kept him locked up over the sabbath, then nailed him up bright and early Sunday morning, when they a block of non-superstitious days ahead of them to do it properly.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  86. @Hodd

    Always wondered what idiots did with their time.

    The author is plainly no idiot but, otherwise, …

    Wonderful irrelevant balderdash. Utter Cod’s Wallop. Latter day BLM statue smashing. What fun!

    Modern day historical jiggery pokery. Next he’s going to claim the Oera Linda is a forgery and the Frisians didn’t found Athens…

    This writer has been reading too much Harry Potter, too much The Hobbit and too much Isaac Asimov.

    I am largely inclined to agree with you. Colorfully put.

    Still, when a history of very long ago has been pieced together from fragmentary sources of various, heterogeneous kinds, one wants some skeptics. The author would fill that rôle.

  87. runeulv says:
    @GMC

    “I often thought that Constantinople was a very important city”

    Constantinople = the ever standing city = Istanbul, and the name Miklagard in Norse= the great city.

    It’s probably the most important city until the ships became big enough to sail across the oceans around just the renaissance (called five hundreds=Cinquecento in Italian).

    • Replies: @GMC
  88. Anonymous[208] • Disclaimer says:
    @brabantian

    The dead sea scrolls exist. Your entire idea about the bible is based on you ignoring reality and trying to make up a stupid explanation for something you don’t want to take the time understanding. The bible has nothing to do with jews, jews do not descend from Israelites. Christianity does not in any way make jews holy or chosen by God, it says they are the sons of Satan and are wicked, evil and hated by God.

    • Agree: kerdasi amaq
  89. runeulv says:
    @22pp22

    “Words beginning with g are very often of Frankish origin including the words for war and warden (guerre and guardien) Guardian was later adopted into English from Norman French”
    And then the English and the French guarded or warded against their enemies to such a degree, that it became the word for war. (I’m sure it’s not the complete story, but it’s not the first time what started as an euphemism ended up as the word for the real thing.)

  90. dearieme says:
    @Norbertus

    Peter went to Rome and …

    Who says Peter went to Rome? The Bible certainly doesn’t.

    When Paul wrote to the Roman Christians he greeted many by name, but did not greet Peter whom he already knew.

    I suspect Peter did the job he’d agreed to do in conferring with James and Paul, namely missionary work amongst the Jews of the Middle East.

  91. @Julian of Norwich

    My thoughts exactly. If this is true, the forgers had astounding genius and unusually prodigious output, exceeding that of virtually any author before or since. Not to mention how many of their points coincided, both with each other (was there a conspiratorial sharing of fake names and dates in the forging underworld?) and with later discoveries.

  92. I know only the mere bare bones of Roman history. What always struck me odd is how did they build an empire with never ending backstabbing and assassination? So if most of it is ultimately a fable, may I humbly ask to what purpose would the fable be told?

  93. Emslander says:
    @Tom67

    Having dissected just a small part of the authours argument I feel I cannot trust the gist of his writing.

    That’s just the part on the Latin language. When you look at his arguments on history, the purpose of this science fiction account is clear. He hates Christianity and dismisses all of the excellent and objective scholarship done by monks and saints between AD 300 and AD 1500.

    The Gospel of Luke at the beginning of the Nativity account declares, “And it came to pass, that in those days there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled.”

    This account was read and taught by Christians since the first century after Christ. The evidence is uncontroverted. Your article is a waste of electrons.

    • Replies: @ariadna
  94. @advancedatheist

    they faced no urgency to execute Jesus on the cross right away;

    Yeah, it’s not like there was mob of thousands of braying insurrectionists flooding into the imperial courtyard screaming “Crucify Him!”, or anything.

    • Replies: @R2b
  95. @dearieme

    Who says Peter went to Rome? The Bible certainly doesn’t.

    Amen, amen, I say to thee, When thou wast younger, thou didst gird thyself and didst walk where thou wouldst. But when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee and lead thee whither thou wouldst not. And this he said, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had said this, he saith to him: Follow me.

    • Replies: @orionyx
  96. @Hippopotamusdrome

    Jesus is not the Moshiach of the Jews. The current Moshiach of the Jews is Netanyahu. Jesus is the Messiah of the Indo-Europeans, the Aryans, and those who align with them, for example, the Muslims, since Jesus is accepted as the Messiah of Islam.

    Just as the Globalists financed the revisionist school of Islamic Studies led by the energumens Patricia Crone, Michael Cook, Volker Popp, Lueling, Ohlig, Puin, Ibn Warraq in order to set the Christians to war against Islam, according to a plan openly announced by Binyamin “Benny” Elon, they also undermined Christianity with the Scofield Bible and the Zionist Evangelists. Here they undermine the legitimacy of European civilization. All of this wanton destruction in order to prepare the New World Order ruled from Jerusalem, the dream of Moloch, Yahweh, and Ezra.

  97. Mike P says:

    The stories of how the various manuscripts were discovered are not merely implausible but physically impossible. How long would some piece of parchment or vellum or parchment last if stored in some deep, dark, damp dungeon? I would rot away in a few short years.

    Looking forward to the next instalment of this fascinating inquiry. BTW love that funny picture at the top.

    • Replies: @Mike P
  98. Tom67 says:
    @UncommonGround

    I am German and I have studied Latin for ten years. I can read Italian and Spanish newspapers without having studied the languages more than superficially. French is much further away from either of those languages. You can easily demonstrate that by juxtaposing the original Latin with whatever evolved in those three languages. As I am not French I cannot say for certain how long it would have taken me to learn either Italian or Spanish. But I am absolutely certain that Italians and Spaniards will learn each others languages much more quickly that they would learn French.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  99. Mike P says:
    @Nick Kollerstrom

    Sounds like he’s proposing to knock off centuries if not a thousand years from History.

    Maybe I missed something, but I did not get that idea from the article.

  100. Mike P says:
    @Mike P

    I would rot away in a few short years.

    I certainly would, but more importantly so would the parchment.

  101. As Ron Unz can tell you, most of Roman history actually died of disease and malnutrition.

  102. jujubean says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    I am currently reading Fomenko, volume 1, and I can agree that the Russo-centric position is a bit dicey, but his work regarding constellations, stellar movements and celestial events is pretty impressive, granted I’m not an astronomre and certainly cannot confirm his methods.
    I also listened to an intriguing podcast series called “Empire of the Survivors” which referenced Fomenko, among others, in its pursuit of a truth that posited the existence of an alternative civilization which was eventually wiped out for the most part and the efforts of a sinister culture to wipe out all memory of the Survivors. It was pretty surprising.
    There is no mention in this article of the Scaligerian chronology which colors Fomenko’s work and is key to the theory that an entire millenium has been invented. An unfortunate oversight.

  103. @johnm33

    D. Rohl discovered Solomons palace in avaris over 20 years ago, how is that not evidence?

    Some years ago I read an article telling about a sacred old Jewish tomb in Palestine. Jews go there to pray. The article told the history of this tomb. At some time during the 18th or 19th century a man from Scotland went to Palestine and tried to find the places that matched the places that were mentioned in his Bible. He decided that the tomb that he found during his trips was an ancient Jewish tomb. This was written in his report which was deposited in an archive in England. When the Zionists came to Palestine at the end of the 19th century they didn’t know the country as they had no relation to it. So they used the material they found in English archives to help them. The tomb was rediscovered according to the Scotish author and after that Jews begun going there to pray.

    In fact the tomb was the tomb of a Muslim sheik from the 17th century (more or less) and the people of a few Palestinian villages of the region used the tomb as a place to meet during their religious fests (I think the tomb might be a dating or socializing site of the time).

    I looked now quickly the article about Avaris in wikipedia and found no mention of Solomon or of his palace in it. David Rohl ist the author of a chronology of events relating to old Egypt. I ask myself if he isn’t a kind of modern traveller with the Bible in his pocket like the Scotish traveller of the 19th century:

    Rohl asserts that the New Chronology allows scholars to identify some of the main characters in the Old Testament with people whose names appear in archaeological finds. The New Chronology has not gained acceptance among most Egyptologists.

    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auaris

    • Replies: @johnm33
  104. anon[270] • Disclaimer says:
    @22pp22

    Your brilliant argument is unassailable, sir.

    • Replies: @22pp22
  105. JRB says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    Starting from around 100 AD until 400 AD a very large part of the Roman soldiers where from what we now call the Balkans. They were Romanised Illyrians. Their manner of speech must have had an influence on the development of Vulgar Latin. The original Romanians were remnants of these Romanised Illyrians, whose culture and language was for the most part destroyed in the 6th century.

  106. This is an absurd article and one wonders whether or not the author has read Mommsen. When Mommsen wrote his history of the Roman Republic, he did NOT rely on the primary histories of the period. He went by the historical records carved into thousands of monuments and plaques set up to record events or make public various laws passed. Based on these alone, we can corroborate most of the contents of the great historians of the ancient world. Mommsen and a team of assistants spent more than ten years copying and translating into German ALL the extant monuments and plaques throughout Rome and Sicily which were put up between 550 B.C. and the time of Augustus. It was a remarkable achievement. And the result was a remarkable history completely shorn of myth and romanticism.

    • Agree: Seraphim
    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund, TomSchmidt
    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
  107. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:

    Good article. I have always been incredulous that the poor and backward nations of southern Europe could ever have produced these things. It’s no different to the afrocentrist delusions of blacks.

    • Replies: @Weston Waroda
  108. Provided that Hochart was right. That sums it up, and is quite a leap of faith to embark on. Nobody has any way of knowing whether or not these “mysterious coincidences” can actually be attributed to Poggio with any degree of accuracy in the present day.

  109. The COLOSEUM is not a MIRAGE … the Bathhouses of ancient Rome neither .. HERCULANUM and POMPEI have been excavated like so many other Buildings from Roman Times … the ROADS of the Romans up to the RHINE and elswhere can be walked this very day .. The AQUEDUCTS spread out all over the Roman Empire still Exist and can be touched ….The ROMAN GARRISON CITIES on the Rhine , the Danube and many other places still exist and their NAMES can be traced to their Latin Origins …… even as far as to England ..where the Romans also build a Wall …. named Hadrians Wall .. for good measure … The Narrative of the Author , who most likely is East European , may be …even from the BALKANS .. is Interesting ..and provokes THOUGHT…. but after some time looses CREDIBILITY … when Thought has been provoked too far …

    • Replies: @runeulv
  110. @First Millennium Revisionist

    Are you aware of the book by Wilhelm Kammeier Die Fälschung der deutschen Geschichte? It proposes a similar thesis, viz. that European history was essentially rewritten in the 13th/14th centuries through a series of forgeries to cement the historical claims of the Roman Catholic Church.

  111. anon[193] • Disclaimer says:

    Easy to explain.
    There was always an underground stream of false Christians. In humanity was always a category of people attracted to Gnosticism – the opposite of Christianity.
    In the Acts of the Apostles some gnostic tried to buy from Paul with money the “secret” of having superpowers.
    At that time, nobody could openly disputed christianity and the pope. So an indirect attack against Christ was more appropriate.
    Think about The Hell fire Club in the puritan and zelot Britain.
    The same category of people will easily write De rerum natura.

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
  112. SIMP simp says:

    LOL
    Unz is really fucking up the last shred of credibility this website has by publishing this kind of garbage.

  113. So what is the explanation for Pompeii?

    Please don’t drag the good name of revisionism into the dirt with this sort of nonsense.

  114. gay troll says:

    I find aphorisms to be universally true; so what to do when they contradict each other? Conventional wisdom asserts both “history is written by the victors” and “those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it”. I also find it odd to read an article about the invention of ancient Roman history with no reference to the Gospels. Nice shout out to Eusebius, fabulist Christian grifter that he was, but missing from this article’s thesis is the important distinction that history is faked for the sake of religious power. True history is defaced, defamed and incinerated for the same reason.

    Another aphorism is that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, but I may here suggest the inversion of this logic. Corruption empowers, and absolute corruption empowers absolutely. Either way, the human race is ruled by the absolutely corrupt, and their primary means of control is through literary narrative, whether religious or historical or even scientistic. As long as a man puts more faith in the written word than the evidence of his senses and his reason, that man will not be free.

    • Thanks: mark green
  115. @Fidelios Automata

    By George youve got it !!!! All European history is dodgy and needs revision —especially the spectacular Roman Empire which may not have existed BUT if it did it was probably created by someone else apart from Europeans —- buildings ,coinage ,roads etc created by the same people who built flying Pyramids ! The ones who had knowledge stolen from them by evil White devils ! Its on its way so dont laugh too hard —-certain monumental and very recent lies ARE believed !!!

  116. runeulv says:
    @Ole C G Olesen

    “The COLOSEUM is not a MIRAGE … the Bathhouses of ancient Rome neither .. HERCULANUM and POMPEI have been excavated like so many other Buildings from Roman Times ”
    Nobody disputes the buildings, what they claim is that they have been missdated. Pompei does not deviate a lot from renaissance cities.

    If you look at Italian renaissance paintings, a lot depict Christianity’s victory over the heathens, and that is kind of strange if it happened 1200-1300 years before they were painted.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  117. anonlb says:

    Good article, but misses crucial point: historians are not scientists but scribes of rulers. They wrote what is suitable for ruling class. They can’t agree even on events from last century, how we can expect from them true history about events hapened before thousands years?
    Scientist can only debunk someting as forgery, but without time machine can’t reveal true history. The best they can is to make educated guess.

  118. eD says:
    @Tom67

    These are reasonable objections. What became French has a good deal of German and Scandinavian influences and is something of an outlier among Romance languages. I’m also not sure about Portuguese being that similar to Spanish.

    The overall point about classical Latin being a synthetic language, and not actually spoken, is reasonable. Also, the idea that Romanian wound up as an eastern Romance language, because people who lived in the Danubian basin always spoke a proto-Romance language, is interesting and plausible. However, conventional thinking today seems to hold that Latin is an Italic language, part of the Italo-Celtic branch of the Indo-European languages. Illyiran is also considered to be an Italo-Celtic language, and definitely spoken in the Balkans in antiquity. As the article points out, nothing is known about Dacian. Without straying too far from the conventional narrative, you could posit that the Italo-Celtic languages originated in the Balkans or even the Danube basin, and spread westward to Italy prior to the Roman republic. Its not necessary to leap from there to the conclusion that the ancient buildings located in Rome were in fact built during the Renaissance.

  119. eD says:

    These articles are fascinating and I would like to see more of them, but they do remind me of Mark Twain’s observation that the Shakespearean plays were written by Shakespeare, or by someone else with the same name.

  120. @Deplorable Dissident

    Thanks for the link.
    In looking at the Chapter titles, I note that “In the mid XII century, in the year 1152, Jesus Christ is born.”. Putting aside whether the “Roman” narrative is true or not, why are there Cathedrals all over Europe proclaiming the Christian faith that predate 1152 by hundreds of years?
    For example, Canterbury’s origins date back to the 7th century.
    https://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/medieval-england/canterbury-cathedral/

    I’m all for revisionist history, providing it is done in the Barnes tradition.

  121. @runeulv

    If you look at American films from the 1950s, a lot of them depict the Roman Empire, which is kind of strange if it happened 2000 years before they were made

  122. @J

    Finnish (a finno-urgic language) is as concise, if not moreso, than Latin. Given the geographic range of the language group passes Romania (Hungarian is also of the same language group, it is not unreasonable to assume Latin is real. Not a big fan of Wiki, but
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_noun_cases

  123. Dumbo says:

    Why should we trust the words of a scholar who doesn’t even sign his own name?

    And in this case it’s not even for any logical fear of being “cancelled”, since I doubt the elites care too much one way or another about ancient Roman history…

    Anyway, the concept is intriguing but the execution, meh. I think Unz sometimes has this tendency to publish all kinds of “conspiracy theories” possible, some are interesting and relevant, some a bit less.

    Is this guy the same one as “Moon Conspiracy Theorist”?

  124. There goes the whole edifice of ancient Europe

    Ring-a-ring o’ roses,
    A pocket full of posies,
    A-tishoo! A-tishoo!
    We all fall down.[3]

  125. @Grahamsno(G64)

    The work of Plutarch is not known in Europe before 1159, in Latin version, by the quotations in the Polycratic of Jean de Salisbury. We have many works previously attributed to Plutarch but today recognized as fakes, which we now designate as the works of Pseudo-Plutarch.

  126. @Hans Vogel

    Yes, I am familiar wih Heribert Illig, and also with Gunnar Heinsohn, who reaches a different conclusion. About Charlemagne, he rightly points out that there are 15,000 coins bearing his name, and they cannot all be forgeries. But is Carolus Magnus really a personnal name, or a title like Caesar Augustus ? More in the third article.

    • Replies: @Hans Vogel
  127. @Grahamsno(G64)

    If Tacitus’ Annals were a forgery you’d think that the forgers would at least put Glowing descriptions of the Christians in Tacitus’ works

    No : the forgers weren’t only out for money : they were humanists secretly at war with Christianity. This is one reason they wrote under ancient pen names.
    That Tertullian, Jerome & Orosius mention Tacitus only proves that Tacitus’s name, the titles of his books and bits and pieces of it were known before his full work was forged. The forgers were smart enough to write works of known and prestigious authors. But anyway, if you bear with me for two more articles, you will understand that Hochart was only partially right : some of the ancient works found in 9-11th century manuscripts left to rot in monastery attics were not frauds.

  128. @Anonymous

    True, while you can’t take a stroll through the ruins of Wakanda, yet it is possible to wander through the streets of the Forum (where you can personally see the Arch of Titus commemorating the Roman victory in the Jewish War, complete with Menorah as spoil) or look at the wall paintings of Pompeii, take in the Colisseum or the Pantheon, or tread the stones of the Appian Way. And it is all the more amazing that these poor and backward nations produced great works of literature and from the likes of Dante, Michelangelo and Raphael, gave us music from the angels in the works of Palestrina, and invented such backward forms of art as opera or even in their backwardness managed to head an expedition of discovery to the terra incognita of the Americas. Plus, even today, I hear their cuisine is quite something.

  129. @Hippopotamusdrome

    That doesn’t look like a Pict.

  130. Skeptic23 says:

    I was undergrad classics in Ivy League in late 60’s. Started Greek and Latin in prep school also did Sanskrit
    Greek and Sanskrit are beautiful and the literature is the best
    All Latin I read was devoid of style, grace or genius.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  131. eD says:

    To defend the Revisionist, the central claim in the article doesn’t seem to be not that there wasn’t a “Roman Empire”, which as commentators pointed out left behind a lot of fixed structures, but that such an empire existed, but was always based in the Balkans. The conventional narrative is that the Roman Empire was constructed by the Italians, and much later on some of the Emperors moved the capital to Constantinople in the Balkans. The revisionist argument I take it is that the empire was always based in the Balkans, and that all accounts of the Republic, as well as most accounts of the early empire, both of which were obviously based in Italy, are Italian Renaissance fabrications.

    I do think that the standard account of non-Chinese history before the printing press is much more thinly sourced and mythical than most people realize, so I find these articles interesting. Chinese history is better sourced, but finding good translations of Chinese historians is a problem for westerners. Post printing press there is a lot of material, especially after the industrial revolution, but it gets increasingly mixed in with fabricated propaganda.

    However, the generally accepted accounts are usually our best guess as to what went on. Sometimes you can state that the standard account is implausible, even on occasion impossible, but it is not like there is some preserved alternative account that is more accurate.

    The article is strongest on the claim that most of our written material about the Republic and early empire likely being forgeries. However, it makes two central claims as to why an Italian based empire is implausible. One is the lack of medieval buildings in Rome. But such buildings did exist, the original Basilica of St. Peter being the most notable example, and were torn down during the Renaissance or afterwards, often more recently as part of historical preservation efforts.

    The other is that later emperors (generally post Diocletian) tended to be based around the Bosphorus (Nicomedia and then Constantinople). First, this is not quite true. Diocletian administratively divided the empire, as the article notes, and the Western Emperors based themselves in Italy, usually northern Italy, though up to Olybrius, who died in 472, several lived in Rome itself, and the imperial palace on the Palatine hill has been excavated. Also, the Senate remained in Rome, though a second Senate was created for the eastern empire, and the Roman Senate is documented to have been active in the early seventh century AD. So revisionist history still has to account for Rome remaining a place of importance, for some centuries after Diocletian.

    Nor is a transfer of the capital implausible. This happened in other empires, notably the various Chinese dynasties. Since the principal role of the Emperors was as commander in chief of the Roman army, and said army was stationed on the frontiers, a process where Emperors spent less of their time at Rome itself is understandable. Remember, the Senate remained at Rome even if the executive was elsewhere. We would expect the emperors to at least remain in Italy, but the Western Emperors did remain in northern Italy. The Illyiran Emperors based themselves in the Balkans because that is where they were from.

    However, because ancient history is so thinly sourced, a revisionist could posit that a Macedonian King (a successor of Alexander, if Alexander himself is not a myth), conquered Italy and then other territories to the West, while also taking over or holding on to the Alexandrine conquests of Syria and Egypt. The city of Rome would still grow to importance due to its location. But its not clear why these Macedonian rulers would not bother documenting their own conquests, or why the Byzantines would not do so. Its also not clear why they would have food shipped to the conquered city of Rome, from around the empire, to be distributed free to the Roman Deplorables, along with animals shipped to Rome for free games held in the city.

    One thing that has bothered me about the standard accounts of ancient history is why so much of the material is found in abandoned storage rooms in monasteries in Western Europe, and nothing in Eastern Orthodox or Turkish archives.

    • Thanks: mark green
  132. FB says: • Website

    About the false Donation of Constantine, the author notes that…

    …it is admitted that this document was forged by medieval popes in order to justify their claim on Rome…

    The Roman Catholic Church may in fact have been the source of all these falsifications and fairy tales about the ‘ancient’ Rome…

    We may see a lot of the accepted historical narrative quite vigorously debunked as archeology and anthropology proceeds apace…two solid scientific disciplines that brook no bullshit…

    What I would like to learn more about is dating methods…and really just how ‘scientific’ they are…?

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Alden
    , @LankyTunes
  133. @Alba -

    Mannan ap Llyr comes to mind.

  134. I have had the happy experience of reading some of Tacitus and some of Lucretius. Their styles are idiosyncratic to an extreme. Tacitus claims to write sine ira et studio [without anger and partiality]. Lucretius delights in watching from an eminence two armies slaughtering one another in the plain. Who upon reading a few of the many works written by Cicero does not get a sense of a unique sensibility of the writer? Who was the Renaissance scholar or scholars who could invent such extremely different idiosyncratic styles? Renaissance scholars did not have the support of the massive scholarship that has come into existence after their time so would necessarily make a significant number of egregious anachronisms that a specialist in that author would not overlook. The author of this article is assigning to a putative forger a superhuman Wissenschaft.

    It is not that difficult to distinguish between genuine and imitation. Consider the works of Plato, approximately 25 of them accepted as written by that author, and 5 or so other dialogues ascribed to Plato which are pastiches written by imitators in antiquity. Close examination and a bit of reflection about Plato’s austere sensibility should convince you that for example the dialogue The L0vers was not written by Plato. See note 3 of my paper “Blushing in Plato” at http://www.charlesumlauf.com/blushing2.htm.

    I mean to read the entirety of this article and I would like to reserve the option to comment further.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  135. It’s all a Jewish screen play.

  136. @22pp22

    Gwylan – Welsh for gull. Yr wylan is gull with a definite article.

    The Frank’s couldn’t say G. Guillaume, Gwilym but Wilhelm and William.

    • Replies: @22pp22
  137. @anon

    category of people attracted to Gnosticism – the opposite of Christianity.

    While Gnosticism is not Roman Catholicism, it is not “the opposite of Christianity” either. There were early Christians who were Gnostics, they just didn’t buy into the dominant version of Christianity.
    Dissenters is more accurate.

    • Disagree: GazaPlanet
  138. @niteranger

    “Her thesis was that she proved their were horses in America prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Her resources were old Indian lore”

    That’s not unreasonable, actually. We can be pretty sure the Indians led to the die-off of megafauna of North America. If you’re not familiar with a horse as a source of motive power, it looks like a lot of grass-fed food. Could Indians have encountered North American horses, killed them off before domesticating them, and had some memory of them? Unlikely, but not unreasonable.

    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @niteranger
  139. @Zarathustra

    You are wrong. This is a great analysis. Pay attention, the Illuminati is watching you.

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
  140. @Anonymouse

    The Renaissance scholar would also have had to have forged hundreds of Medieval manuscripts referring to Horace, Cicero, Ovid, Virgil etc.

  141. This is a 14th century manuscript of Zonaras Epitome of History

    He endorses the standard account of Roman history; this is a quote from the first page of the Routledge translation.

    [MORE]

    Because the history had taken note of Romans and of Rome, I
    thought it necessary for me to write about these, too, and to hand
    down whence and from what the people of the Romans had its
    beginning; by whom the region of Italy was previously inhabited;
    whence Romulus, the man who became the founder of Rome, was
    brought forth to the light of day; how Remus, his brother, was
    killed and then, too, how the former disappeared; how the city itself
    was first ruled; what manners and customs it employed;24 how
    Tarquinius Superbus, after he had changed the sovereignty to a
    tyranny, was deposed; how many and what sort of wars Rome waged
    as a result of his deposition; how conditions for Romans were changed
    to aristocracy and then democracy, with consuls and dictatores, then
    tribunes, too, [13] performing the administration of public affairs;25
    what the consulship was in olden days, what the dictatorship was,
    and what the work of the censors was; what term was assigned to
    each of these offices; what a triumph was like among them and
    whence this name was introduced;26 what sorts of things, even if
    not everything—through lack of books detailing these things—
    happened in the times of the consuls;27 how, from these, rule for
    the Romans later changed to monarchy; how, even if not clearly,
    Gaius Julius Caesar first pretended to this, then, after he had been
    killed upon the speaker’s platform by those who clung to liberty,
    Augustus Octavius Caesar, who was a nephew of the slain Caesar
    and who had been given to him in adoption, pursued the killers of
    his adoptive father, having Antony, too, participating with him in
    the work, and how, when he had afterwards quarreled also with
    him, he had been victorious in a naval battle off Actium, and then,
    when he had overtaken him after he had fled to Alexandria with
    Cleopatra, he brought the man to such a degree of necessity that
    he even killed himself; the extent of Roman losses in these civil
    wars, first when Octavius and Antony took the field against Brutus,
    Cassius, and Caesar’s other killers, and then when these men battled
    against one another; how Cleopatra, Egypt’s queen, a descendant of
    the Ptolemies, was taken alive [14] how she, too, killed herself, so
    it was concluded, by the bite of an asp; and that thus, after he had
    returned to Rome with brilliant victory celebrations, Octavius
    pursued absolute rule and transformed the leadership of the Romans

    So how did Italian Renaissance scholars travel back in time to fabricate this? Or did the Byzantines themselves decide to invent an unflattering history, for unknown reasons?

  142. tl;dr certainly applies to this article. It seems to be an instance of Velikovsky mania: a grab bag of notions which overwhelms the lay reader with what seems like omniscience. But pull on a random loose end and the fabric self-destructs. Note that none of the writings that are claimed by the author to be forgeries is examined textually. The assumption that a Renaissance forgery of an ancient text would not possess the slightest anachronism or linguistic anomaly is impossible. I doubt the author reads Latin. Composing writings in the style of Cicero was a common school exercise in antiquity so it is not surprising that Petrarch and other Renaissance worthies would be capable of doing the same. On the other hand, Tacitus’ style is extremely gnarly and for that reason could not be the product of a Renaissance scholar for where would he have learned the details of the wars Tacitus describes, not to speak of inventing such an idiosyncratic Latin. So far as I know, the information about the wars that Tacitus provides agrees with other ancient historians.

    The author of this article might inform us where he read classics.

    • Replies: @N word sayer
    , @FB
  143. As for your query: “For instance, a comparison between Marcus Aurelius’ bronze equestrian statue (formerly thought to be Constantine’s), with, say, Louis XIV’s, makes you wonder: how come nothing remotely approaching this level of achievement can be found between the fifth and the fifteenth century?)”

    Let me hypothesize the interregnum was somehow due to the “dark ages” that eclipsed Europe during that period after debauchery destroyed Rome’s moral fiber, its conscripted legions fell apart as the US Army did in Vietnam, its slave based production system collapsed, and the invading “Barbarians” from the north descended on Western part of the Empire and transformed it into a land of chaos.

    Thus nobody during that period had the knowledge, inclination, resources, etc. to cast such magnificent statues that required a high degree of craftsmanship and metallurgical knowledge.

    I would also point out that referring to the manuscripts you analyze as “forgeries” gives me pause about the logic and evidence on which you argue the case for the simple reason that for there to be a “forgery” of any kind requires some kind of “genuine original.” Thus if, as you say, the manuscripts are forgeries, what are the originals and how close are the forgeries to the originals. If not forgeries, then they are fabrications such as the holohoax. And if what we have come to know as Roman history is like the holohoax, what then is the real history of people who left behind such artifacts as aqueducts running dozens if not to as far as a hundred miles that still work and other statues and buildings throughout Europe?

    Let me suggest that your notion of forged manuscripts rings truer than you imagine. For just suppose that clever forgers were aware that powerful men would pay lots of money to gain possession of allegedly ancient manuscripts written to support current historical dogmas and the interests of the then powerful. The forgers indeed acquired original documents that didn’t completely comport to the prevailing political dogmas of the powerful. So they modernized the history by making stuff up that they sprinkled into the falsification they created based on some original documents.

    Now what is the least they would have to do to ensure their partial truth was not exposed as a complete forgeries?

    Oh, destroy the originals, that would expose them twice. First by utterly discrediting the authenticity of the forgery and second by failing to substantiate the current version of history that served to bolster the position of the present elites.

    Thus the manuscripts you describe could well be yet another version of Plato’s Noble Lies updated to serve the interests of the rulers of the period in which they were created.

    • Thanks: Hiram of Tyre
    • Replies: @FB
    , @ploni almoni
  144. The Pauline Epistles – Re-Studied and Explained
    Edwin Johnson, M.A., 1894
    Formerly Professor of Classical Literature in New College,
    S. Hampstead
    http://www.egodeath.com/edwinjohnsonpaulineepistles.htm

    This 100-page book from 1894 shows that:

    · The Paul figure was a literary invention from the 1500’s

    · The purportedly early Church Father writings were literary inventions of the 1500’s

    · Eusebius’ Church History was written in the 1500’s.

    · The Gospels were written in the 1500’s.

    · No Cathedrals are ancient; they are from the early part of the modern period, such as 1400.

    · We don’t know how many centuries actually lie between the time of Augustus Caesar and the modern era — the time of the Roman Empire is likely several centuries closer. The Radical Critic Hermann Detering pointed out to Uwe Topper that Johnson anticipates Illig, Topper, and the New Chronology. The New Chronology holds that the Dark Ages — the years 600-900 — didn’t exist; for example, the year 911 is the year 614, relabelled, with later historians projecting fantasy events into the phantom 300-year period that never existed, as though I claimed there were 300 years between now and now, filled with all sorts of literary inventions. Johnson goes even further, writing “It has been said that Greek letters were silenced in Italy during about the period “700-1400″ of our chronology. The statement is really without meaning, for the period is imaginary.” Uwe Topper was amazed to discover the present book, which made his own would-be radical New Chronology look like a mere leap-year calendar adjustment.

    Many of Johnson’s points are revolutionary, even if some might turn out to need repositioning such as in light of the Nag Hammadi library and Dead Sea scrolls. How would Johnson interpret these finds? What adjustments do we make to integrate Johnson’s findings with Bart Ehrman’s 2003 book “Lost Christianities: The Battle for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew”?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  145. anonymous[212] • Disclaimer says:

    The author of this article could have a great future writing for the History Channel. Perhaps the Ancient Aliens built Roman monuments and created Latin.

  146. Stan says:

    What is the ethnicity of first millenium revisionist? The results of Jewish revisionists of American history is evident in the vandalism and desecration of statues of American founding fathers.

  147. Max Payne says:

    This guy critically thinks.

  148. Alden says:
    @Malla

    Wasn’t Frank Firangi etc a general term for European all over the Mid East, N Africa Central Asia , E Asia India etc? I believe it was.

    • Replies: @Malla
  149. Alden says:

    Very Interesting article. I’m looking forward to the next.

  150. utu says:
    @22pp22

    “This is rubbish. Real rubbish. Total rubbish.” – What else would you expect from KGB sponsored project?

  151. The inhabitants of Dacia north of the Danube adopted Latin from the non-Italian legions that stationed on the lower part of their territory from 106 to 271 AD, and completely forgot their original language, to the point that no trace of it is left. They were so Romanized that their country came to be called Romania, and that Romanian is now closer to Latin than are other European Romance languages. Yet the Romans hardly ever occupied Dacia (on the map above, Dacia is not even counted as part of the Roman Empire). The next part is also extraordinary: Dacians, who had so easily given up their original language for Vulgar Latin, then became so attached to Vulgar Latin that the German invaders, who caused the Romans to retreat in 271, failed to impose their language. So did the Huns and, more surprisingly, the Slavs, who dominated the area since the seventh century and left many traces in the toponymy. Less than ten percent of Romanian words are of Slavic origin (but the Romanians adopted Slavonic for their liturgy).

    “For more than a century and a half the Transylvanian Basin and the plain to the south constituted the Roman province of Dacia. Officials, soldiers, and merchants from all over the Roman world settled alongside the native Dacians. Although the population was ethnically diverse, Roman administration, numerous cities, and the Latin language brought about intense Romanization and rapid integration into the empire.”—Encyclopaedia Brittanica Dacia was home to a thriving trade network that extended into central and northern Europe and as such constituted a threat to Roman hegemony. Under Roman rule, this proclivity for trade in Dacia would have continued and adoption of the Latin language would have been incentivized by commerce. The population was diverse, which also incentivized the use of Latin in order to communicate. A critical mass of Latin speakers was quickly arrived at that unlike the the situation in Brittanica, persisted following the withdrawal of the Roman legions. From Encylopaedia Brittanica again: “The ethnogenesis of the Romanian people was probably completed by the 10th century. The first stage, the Romanization of the Geto-Dacians, had now been followed by the second, the assimilation of the Slavs by the Daco-Romans.” So the Latin language united the diverse groups in the Romanian heartland, and then worked to assimilate the Slavs.

    You have an interesting thesis, that some key Latin works are forgeries from the Renaissance Era, and that needs to be looked at and carefully considered, but where is the evidence for the idea that Dacia constitutes the homeland of the Latins? As for Romanian preserving some of the case endings of Latin, that could be explained by the tendency of isolated areas to preserve toward linguistic conservatism. Romania, isolated from other Romance language groups, changed less as far as grammar, preserving the older forms of Latin, at least more than did its sister languages. We need not hypothesize that Dacian gave rise to Latin.

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/history-of-Romania

    • Replies: @Weston Waroda
    , @Seraphim
  152. vot tak says:

    Why the anonymous nick instead of using one’s real name for an article which claims it is serious research?

    That right there should alert everyone to an obvious scam in progress.

    Honest academics and researchers don’t play those games. The hoaxers, and the bs merchants do it. The phonies. The modern day erik von dannikans do it.

    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome
  153. syonredux says:

    RE: Tacitus,

    This site discusses the forgery question:

    http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/tacitus/

    • Replies: @zimriel
    , @R2b
    , @R2b
  154. Alden says:

    I’d like to mention that the Justinian Plague, about 500-650 AD was responsible for the so called dark ages . So many Europeans and mid easterners died that no histories were written and in some areas the grandchildren of the survivors didn’t know who built those huge building all around them.

    What happened after the fall of Rome and 700 AD cannot be discussed without acknowledging the enormous death rate of the Justinian Plague from Britain and Germany to N Africa and the Mid East and W Asia.

  155. @Tom67

    Every argument offered for the thesis of this essay is so mind-blowingly facile one doesn’t even know where to begin, and so one can’t really be bothered.

    I will say, though, that a friend of mine several years ago predicted just this: that the pivot (or better yet, backsliding) of the “dissident right” into trad Christianity of various types, particularly of the High Church variety, would be accompanied by a hard shilling of “New Chronology.”

    Just like the Church Fathers and Christian imperial Rome before them, Christians today understand that the literary, artistic, philosophical, scientific, and monumental achievements of pre-Christian civilization are a major source of discredit to the Church and Christianity.

    The early Church new this, which is why it devoted so much time to suppressing and destroying Paganism. So much is lost because of their deliberate neglect and in some cases (certain works of Porphyry, for example) targeted destruction.

    Philosophical, humanistic Greco-Roman paganism was always the most dangerous competitor to Christianity, and the rediscovery in the late Medieval period of so many previously lost works – both thanks to Arabic and Greek translation movements that predated 1453, and because of the flood of Greek scholars fleeing Islam to Italy after 1453 – did permanent damage to Christianity that it still has not recovered from.

    The load of horseshit represented by this essay is a religiously motivated campaign of delegitimization by Christians who know that, held side-by-side, their irrational, despotic, Frankenstein tradition will lose to the wisdom of the ancients.

    P.S. to take one example from the piece, it is easier for Christians to posit that the heritage of Classical Civilization must have been forged, because the other option – that Christians were neglectful and scornful of such things, and also incapable of reproducing them thanks to the spiritual and intellectual desert formed in them by their arbitrary Levantine theology – holds up a mirror to them, and there is nothing that terrifies a Christian more than honest self-reflection.

    • Agree: vot tak, GeeBee
    • Replies: @GazaPlanet
  156. @Julian of Norwich

    They do, and have enormous talent as well. The author lists 2 works that were forged by Michaelangelo himself. It’s cataclysmic when the ground shifts under one’s feet. I feel for you.

  157. Jake says:
    @trelane

    “Very interesting?” It is a mix of some interesting things to question with a whole lot of garbage.

  158. @Exalted Cyclops

    And the mothership was built with juju finance, voodoo architecture and nganga materials …

  159. @dearieme

    Peter went to Rome according to ‘Quo Vadis?’ by Henryk Adam Aleksander Pius Sienkiewicz. The article ‘How fake is Roman antiquity’ actually raises Renaissance humanism to unforeseen machiavellian heights, with humanists salting the truth with their own grandiose imaginations. Now why should the humanists have done otherwise? Because they were truthful ‘nothing but the truth’ lovers? This article also puts Martin Luther’s Reformation in a different perspective.

  160. Very interesting. I always found it incredible that the main introductory text for Latin learners was a book written by Julius Caesar himself.

    I must say, however, that your linguistic arguments are completely groundless. Beyond Tom67’s 100% accurate criticisms, Latin is attested from the exact area of (western) Rome from great antiquity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Latin#Corpus), and is clearly related to the other languages of the Italic branch of Indo-European, which also have ancient attestation in the region. Faliscan in particular is a very close relative of Latin, attested from the same area on the southern fringes of Etruria.

    Romanian is a puzzle of its own. There’s a fierce debate over just how indigenous Romanians are, centered on whether or not they are actually the linguistic descendants of Roman Dacians. Romanian nationalists tend to prefer that explanation; I don’t, for the reasons you mention yourself. Interestingly, Albania presents another probable example of a tribe of mountain-dwelling Balkan shepherds (as the early Vlachs were) descending to the lowlands in the middle ages to form the heart of a new nation. The Albanian language shows massive influence from Roman-era Latin, despite the territory of modern Albania being part of the Greek sphere of influence in the Balkans, and moreover there are no attestations of Albanians in the area until medieval Byzantine sources.

  161. @Anonymouse

    The author makes one ridiculous, leading, loaded assertion after another, but as you say, it all falls apart upon closer examination:

    -he conflates pseudoepigrapha as a literary device that was intended to be found out with politically or religiously motivated forgeries that were not intended to be found out

    -he implies that ancient historical works being full of fanciful or inaccurate claims (to be expected when the subject is mythic and legendary history predating the author by many centuries) is actually proof of late, forged authorship (as if ancient historians could not be wrong/confused)

    -he paints monks with a broad brush in order to construct contradictions that don’t actually exist (that the painstaking work of one generation of monks was neglected and scorned by later generations of monks who didn’t share their philosophical and literary interests is well within the realm of plausibility)

    -he implies that lack of manuscripts = proof of forgery. I suppose the fact that so much of Medieval German architecture was destroyed by carpet bombing in WW2 is proof that Medieval German buildings actually never existed, if we follow this logic consistently.

    -he implies that a Pope offering money for manuscripts means that the manuscripts paid for must be forgeries (perhaps the monetary incentive just motivated people to go search through dusty old monasteries or part with family heirlooms?)

    -he claims that the failure of Medieval Christian civilization to reproduce the artistic and literary achievements of Classical Civilization is proof of forgery, when in reality it is just proof that Medieval Christians were talentless and uncreative by comparison

    there are many more that came to mind before I stopped reading about half-way through, this is just the tip of the iceberg, without even going into the actual technical details of language, textual criticism, etc, which the author does brutal violence, as others in these comments have pointed out.

    • Agree: West reanimator
  162. @Rev. Spooner

    If the Classical authors are Renaissance forgeries, why are there references to and quotations from Classical authors in Medieval Literature (12th-13th century) of which hundreds of manuscripts survive?

    For instance, Le Roman de la Rose predates the Renaissance, has 100+ extant manuscripts and mentions Ovid, Tibullus, Virgil, Socrates etc.

    Policraticus, by John of Salisbury, quotes Horace at length (along with many other authors and incidents from antiquity) and survives in 60+ manuscripts from as early as the 12th century

  163. @traducteur

    Do you suppose your late Latin master is turning in the grave because of the assaulting article or to the rude, albeit too late, awakening to the fact he had been taught hogwash and in return had taught it?

  164. The article calls into question everything we know about Rome. But where does that leave the New Testament, which includes the names of the specific roman emperors and governors of the period? What about Pontius Pilate and the various centurions who spoke with Christ. “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s,” Jesus said, looking at a Roman coin. Are we to reject all of the eyewitness accounts recorded in the Bible for a theory explained by an author who writes under a pseudonym? Now that would be foolish.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @anonymous
  165. atzavar4 says:
    @Tom67

    I can confirm Harper´squote is correct. I´m spanish, catalan and I can understand without any problem be it italian, portuguese, french or occitan and yes, they do ressemble each other a lot, the closest the more. But still I´m unable to properly understand latin, I´ve to guess too many blind spots when reading it.

    There is many scholars by now who accept that romance languages do not come from latin. There are many supossitions on which would be then the oldest languaje of the romance ones. Some authors like Yves Cortez (author of the book “Le français ne vient pas du latin”) believe the origin would be a kind of ancient italian, Carmen Jimenez Huertas is still on the search (an english subtitled interview with her addressing the issue: https://youtu.be/SPI_Y4hdIaU ) some other researchers like Ribero Meneses or Julio Cejador mean that the oldest was the basque, strongly related to greek and then to spanish and the rest of romance languajes.

    This last theory seems to be the more plausible to me, in part beacuse I´ve been living in Norway for ten years and at the end could always recognize another spanish perosn only by the way they would speak norwegian, I would never fail except with those of greek origin, they sound exactly as spanish do when speaking norwegian … Carmen Jimenez Huertas talks more about this “prosody” connection during her interview linked above. In fact Greek, Basque and Spanish ressemble a lot too, they only use 5 vowels and pronunciation is very similar, one must accurate enunciate each letter as written when reading them.

    Now that they are starting to decipher the Iberian script, it is meant by many that the ancient iberian languaje was indeed basque (from which later would descend the greek and spanish languajes). This makes sense with reports from historians like Parellada de Cardellac or Arbois de Jubanville which recall the existence of the Magna Iberia extending until the river Rhône (and beyond) before the Romans, Today in Nimes or Arles in France you could believe to be in Andalucia because of their bullfighting & “Gipsy” traditions…

    Well, I don´t want to extent myself too much. Just to say that most of what you are taught today is false as it is whatever you´ll see on TV. One has to dig for the truth oneself because nobody is gonna give you anything for free.

  166. @Tom67

    That is pure and utter bulshit. French doesn´t resemble Occitan more than any other. There is a veritable gulf betweenb the two. In fact French is in a league of its own.

    The kindly Parisienne who rented us a hotel room in Montmartre years ago clued me in to the close correspondence between French and Italian, which has proven to be a most valuable tip. She didn’t seem to think French was in a league of its own. And Occitan is kind of between Italian and French, linguistically and geographically.

  167. @First Millennium Revisionist

    So I presume you are more inclined to go along with Giovanni Carnevale, according to whom Charlemagne was a historical figure, but who remained in the Marches region and in Italy for most of his life. When writing a history of that region (Le Marche. A History of Italy’s Hidden Gem, Carlomagno Publishers, 2016), it struck me there were practically no historical remains from the period that Illig classified as invented.

    Not being a medievalist, I don’t know who to believe, but when I asked a number of renowned authorities in the field, I received only angry answers. Which in turn makes me believe there is something very fishy about Charlemagne as a historical figure (http://www.historien.nl/raadsels-rond-karel-de-grote/)

  168. FB says: • Website
    @Anonymouse

    If, as you say, the entire narrative here ‘falls apart’ by pulling on one loose thread…then by all means go ahead and give us a thorough dive into such a ‘thread’…

    What I see here is that an enterprising little Italian of the fifteenth century has been known to have forged quite a bit of ‘historical’ writing that may not at all be what it purports…

    The fact that some of these writings are in fact key linchpins to the whole story of Roman ‘antiquity’ as we are led to believe is not reassuring…

    You are claiming here a quite ridiculous argument…that the known to be forged writings have not themselves been ‘examined’…examined for what…?…that they are such fine pieces of writing that they must be genuine…or that they are consistent with a style of that purportedly ‘ancient’ time…?

    That is entirely a SUBJECTIVE matter…and it is hardly within the scope of this article to get into the writings themselves so deeply as to derail the entire storyline [which encompasses a lot more than just these few writings…]

    Your complaint sounds quite crude and unpersuasive…[but I am willing to hear something a little more persuasive…]

  169. FB says: • Website
    @the shadow

    More bloated verbiage from the ersatz ‘academic’…

    You obviously didn’t even read the article…the existence of engineering and architectural structures does not necessarily PROVE the stories attached to those real structures, including when they were built and by whom…

    Also try to be a little less verbose…I have never seen anyone that uses so many words to say so little…

    • Replies: @the shadow
  170. atzavar4 says:
    @atzavar4

    Apart from Fomenko´s work I would also recommend Francesco Carotta´s book “Jesus was Caesar”

  171. marylinm says:

    I wonder what would some random student of history 2000 years hence say about the last two centuries of deceit. Probably a very similar meaningless hogwash of interest only to a narrow clique of “professionals” educated above and beyond the level of their intellect.

  172. Alden says:
    @FB

    Anthropology may have begun as an attempt to create a solid science. But by the 1930s it totally deteriorated into anti White commie Jewish propaganda. Surely you’ve heard of Boas and Mead,? Some 19th century English anthropologists claimed the Irish , native Irish, not Ulstermen we’re just white skinned blue eyed negroes who somehow ended up on the western edges of Europe. I wonder what their motivation was?

    As for archeology, everything is subject to interpretation. Look at the ridiculous biblical archeologists of the 19 th century and Israelis of today. Every cistern was Jacob’s grave, every pile of stone something from the Bible and Jews worship a Roman era retaining wall claiming it’s the remains of Solomon’s great temple which probably only existed as an adobe hut with a wooden and thatch roof if it existed at all.

    The archeology of Rome is still there, and much of it is still in use, such as part of the City of Rome sewer system, aqueducts S European roads etc.

    Archeology is a lot more scientific than anthropology but it’s very subject to interpretation. Thor Heyerdahl’s theory that ancient Egyptians travelled to America to build the Aztec pyramids? Joseph Smith’s theory that some of the ancient tribes of Israel travelled to N America?

    Out of Africa concocted at Cal Berkeley by a feminazi using biased samples to prove a foregone conclusion? Ever heard of modern human Java man 700,000 years before the first black African allegedly arrived in Europe 40,000 BC and somehow lost the kinky fur long skinny limbs and magically turned blonde, blue and fair due to cloudy skies? Greek Athena claiming the ancient Egyptians ancient Greeks and even ancient Chinese and Indians written by Jew Bernal were black?

    Anthropology is just a collection of currently fashionable theories, subject to change every few years. Since the time of Boas and Mead it’s just been part of the arsenal of anti White, anti European civilization propaganda. Sir Thomas More’s Utopia of a primitive S American paradise was written and accepted as fiction.

    The ever changing nonsense of anti White anti White European civilization anthropology propaganda shouldn’t be accepted as science, history or anything but the nonsense it is.

    • Disagree: FB
    • Replies: @Poco
  173. @Alden

    The article is fascinating but above my present capacity to understand and beyond my time constraints to fully absorb.

    I’m still trying to come up with an adequate response regarding Augustine, in Laurent Guyénot’s The Devil’s Trick: Unmasking the God of Israel
    https://www.unz.com/article/the-devils-trick-unmasking-the-god-of-israel/#comment-3903202

    From browsing NewAdvent, that appears to be the amateur work of a Catholic layman, Augustine and the papacy from immediately after “Peter” until well into the fifth century (so far) is emerging as a highly political; Augustine was the opportunistic John Bolton of his era. Tragically, the political decisions of that centuries-long span set the pattern for an ostensibly spiritual-religious tradition.

    A key question I’d like to resolve was raised by Priss Factor in an earlier comment: Priss wrote that Jews did not missionize/proselytize, but that “Christians did.” A recent lecture on World History made the same claim.

    It’s certainly the case that today’s Christians consider it their right and obligation to “Christianize” the entire world, the ideological basis for USA quest to “democratize” the entire world; to “make them like us, since we are exceptional.”
    I trace that attitude to so-called Judea-Christianity’s foundation in Abrahamism: according to Maimonides, Abraham believed that his take on who and what god was was the the One True understanding, and that he & his followers had the right and obligation to enforce their beliefs on one and all, even to the point of killing those who thought otherwise.

    So Priss’s contention that “Jews do not missionize” must be nuanced: Jews do not seek to include others in their tribe, but they do set out to destroy all who do not believe as they do.

    The early popes discussed on the NewAdvent Catholic website (linked above) were very much in agreement with both of those ideologies:
    a. missionize as many foreign — “pagan” — peoples as can be reached, convert them to our superior ways; and
    b. if they resist, kill ’em. Numerous thinkers and ‘interpreters’ of what one supposes was the ‘message of Jesus’ whose thoughts and teachings ran counter to those acceptable to Augustine and the political and papal leaders he allied himself with, were summarily dispatched in one way or the other, not unlike today: their books/writings destroyed, their ability to speak, teach, influence others short-circuited even by

    My guess is that Joe Sixpack Catholics-in-the-pews have no knowledge whatsoever of the political struggles of the first 500 years of Roman Catholicism, and that it was dominated not by persons interested in perpetuating the teachings and example of Jesus, but by Romans, Africans, Anatolians, Greeks, and Jews (the fifth pope, Avaristus, was a Greek Jew) who were jockeying for political position.

    In other words, the message of Jesus, such as it was, prevailed for only a very limited span of time.
    [ BUT — Thomas Jefferson GOT IT! ]

    Having spent so much of my life influenced by Roman Catholicism, learning about its actual, heavily politicized foundations = the bottom dropping out.

    Information that even that “Roman” foundation was fraudulent = not only the bottom dropped out, it is dust and ashes.

    Just at a time when “the bottom is dropping out” and reducing the American experiment to “dust and ashes,” I’m taking to heart the recommendation of Dmitry Orlov: Unless you’re Jesus & can walk on water, buy a boat; learn to sail.
    https://www.resilience.org/stories/2013-10-09/review-the-five-stages-of-collapse-by-dmitry-orlov/

    • Replies: @Alden
  174. @Rev. Spooner

    It must have been similar to the shock you experienced when you found out that Moses never existed and the Exodus never took place. I feel for you.

  175. Alden says:
    @Truthdefender

    Roman historian Tacitus. “ In the reign of Tiberius*, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea a rebel Jewish preacher was executed.”

    * 14 to 37 AD, the years when Jesus was preaching and executed. Tacitus also recorded the great fire of Rome 60s AD and Nero’s blaming the followers of Christ ( Greek for priest) the Jewish preacher executed by Pontus Pilate.

    I’m sure there were a lot of forgeries or just made up documents . And I’m sure a lot of the conventional wisdom is truth. And most of the conventional histories of the first millennium completely ignore the Justinian Plague as does this author.

    Here’s my opinion on why the Muslim Arabs were able to conquer so much of the Mediterranean world and S Europe 650-800AD.

    The Justinian Plague Killed so many of the peoples of the Mediterranean and Europe there weren’t enough men left to defend their territories. Just my opinion and worth more than all the other explanations. It could also explain the success of the Vikings. The plague destroyed the middle populations. It didn’t spread to the far north and south.

    No explanation of what happened in Europe between 400 and 1,000 AD is worth while without discussing the extreme depopulation of the Justinian Plague. It wasn’t the Dark Ages. 500-750 AD was the Death Ages.

  176. anonymous[119] • Disclaimer says:
    @Truthdefender

    “But where does that leave the New Testament . . . Are we to reject all of the eyewitness accounts recorded in the Bible for a theory explained by an author who writes under a pseudonym? Now that would be foolish.”

    Is this a joke? Satire?

    • Replies: @Truthdefender
  177. @Rev. Spooner

    It’s cataclysmic when the ground shifts under one’s feet.

    Yes, but the audacity of the author’s assertion does not constitute evidence for that assertion. This article fails to shift the ground.

    Nevertheless, one needs authority-questioning articles like this. Authority is no longer believed. In the United States, authority has spent decades shredding trust, causing fairly reasonable Americans, for example, (i) to doubt the moon landings and (ii) to assume that vast sums of federal coronavirus relief money are being stolen. The proprietor here at The Unz Review has led many of his readers (iii) to question the Holocaust. Why not then (iv) to wonder whether classical history is fake?

    All four examples used to be the province of cranks. We are all cranks, now.

    How did the last come to pass?

    My own views happen to be (i) moon landings real; (ii) money maybe stolen; (iii) Holocaust maliciously exaggerated; and (iv) classical history accurate with reasonable allowance for mistakes due to missing sources. However, more interesting that my own views is the general loss of trust in authority.

    This is the real lesson the article teaches. No one believes anything any more. Any why should they?

    The author does not persuade me regarding classics, but I do not mock.

  178. KenR says:

    Knew it!

    We wuz kangz!

  179. @Blaque Knee

    Every speech in senate was meticulously recorded preserved and eventually translated into all European languages. You can find it certainly in English.also.
    If you read through that than you will find out that this article is only bulshit.

    • Replies: @FB
  180. @atzavar4

    For anyone knowing a few European languages it is easy to detect the national origin of a non native speaker of any of those languages. But I agree that a Greek speaking a Germanic language sounds very much like a native speaker of Spanish speaking that same language.

    For any educated speaker of a Romance language it is comparatively easy to understand the other Romance languages. Spanish (for its thousands of Arabic and Basque words) and Romanian (with its thousands of words borrowed from Slav languages and Turkish) are the most difficult to understand for other Romance speakers.

    Indeed, Latin is hard to learn. However, once you have mastered it, learning Italian (certainly reading it) is a breeze.

    But it also works that way with the Germanic languages. When you know German, you can at least read and understand Dutch, Frisian, Danish, Swedish and Norwegian, and quite a bit of Icelandic.

    Knowing Russian, one can understand basic Polish, Czech, Slovak, Serbo-Croatian, Bulgarian and Slovenian, and of course Ukrainian and Belorussian.

    Are you sure Basque is related to Spanish and Greek? The structure and vocabulary are not related to either are they? I thought that Basque was considered to be related to Etruscan and perhaps Minoan. This linguistic group once comprised more, now extinct languages, and was probably spoken in Europe before the invasion from the Asian steppes by mounted warriors speaking Indo-European dialects, somewhere around 3,000 years ago.

    • Thanks: Jazman
  181. MH says:

    soooo…who is WE?
    There is no author, and why not?

  182. @Alden

    Let’s hope all the cadavers from the Justinian plague remain in the ground. We don’t need a new pandemic.

    Even if the manuscripts of Tacitus are proved to be forgeries it casts no doubt on the original New Testament documents. Those documents were meticulously hand copied in the very monasteries that allowed the pagan documents to decay.

    The accuracy of the Old Testament manuscripts was conclusively established by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Almost no differences were found between the manuscripts that sat in clay jars in the Qumran Caves for over 2,000 years and modern versions of the same scriptures.

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  183. @Skeptic23

    I don’t know a word of Sanskrit, but studied enough of both Greek and Latin to agree with you entirely.

    It is equally true when comparing Greek and Roman art and ideas: genius on the one hand, as fresh and important today as when conceived; humdrumery on the other, with the very occasional exception (such as the Parthenon and perhaps the Aeneid – well, no, not really) to prove the rule.

    The Gold of Revelation in Jesus Christ, the Silver of Greek thought to provide the intellectual élan, and the Lead of the Empire to provide the unifying force: behold Christendom, the finest work the world has ever known or ever will.

  184. @22pp22

    3 & 4, Place of the verb at the front and dominant use of “to be” happened to Welsh, although in the Welsh case, the use of “to be” permeated all tenses. The use of this verb form is alleged by some to be suggestive that English adopted Welsh grammar forms, despite adopting almost no words.

    I did not know that these may have been a feature of Late Spoken Latin. That puts a different spin on things.

    It should be noted that lowland England, a Romanized area did not develop a Romance language. Brittonic/Welsh/Cornish/Breton picked up words and maybe grammar shifts as above. Anglo-Saxon, which some now think was spoken on the East coast even in pre Roman times didn’t Romanize either although it had cases endings (early Medieval Welsh didn’t). This suggests there was more to the development of Romance languages than Roman presence or even a Gaullish substrate, Britonic, Gaullish, Lusitanian and Celt Iberian all being Celtic. Did the continentals need Late Spoken Latin as a lingua franca more than the insular communities?

  185. Richard B says:
    @trelane

    The author just gave us an excellent demonstration on how to write fake history.

    Of course, they thought they were doing something else.

  186. FB says: • Website
    @Zarathustra

    Every speech in senate was meticulously recorded preserved and eventually translated into all European languages. You can find it certainly in English.

    You can…?

    Great…then why don’t you save me some work and find that for me…?

    And also please let me know what are the oldest documents from which these ‘senate speeches’ have been sourced from…and their provenance…?

    • Replies: @Zarathustra
    , @Zarathustra
  187. utu says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    A concerted attack on Western Civilization and its foundations like Ancient Rome and most importantly on Christianity and the Catholic Church in particular.. The chief beneficiaries of the operation are supposed to be Russians. It is is about the mighty and glorious Russians, Uber-Turbo-Russian prominence in history. It is about moving the Moscow from the Third Rome to the position of the First Rome. The project started still under the auspices of KGB in USSR. You can smell the stench of Lubyanka in it. Look up Anatoly Fomenko.

    “During the Soviet years, Fomenko was frequently involved in the state-sponsored studies, an open source analysis, the subject of which was contemporary Western media news, which were analysed and searched for misinterpretations of actual events by mixed teams consisting of various Soviet scholars, using interdisciplinary approach and statistical analysis of textual information in particular. They routinely received the latest translated issues of the New York Times, The Washington Post, BBC dispatches, etc., as well as wide array of various national and local newspapers, radio and television transcripts, and other open sources, searched them carefully for discrepancies and inconsistencies, preparing the consolidated reports for the official use only.” -Wiki

    Reports from Russia: The New Charlatan Historians, Issue No. 5, (An International Project of the Committee on Intellectual Correspondence Published by the Council on Foreign Relations)

    “The most successful of today’s revisionist chroniclers is the mathematician Anatoly Fomenko. Like Morosov and Gumilev before him, he regards himself as an incorruptible scientific critic of hazy historiographers. Applying statistical methods to their historical narratives, he debunks them by charting curves for such data from specific periods as battles, assassi- nations, or monarchs’ reigns. He then conflates periods with similar curves and explains their duplications as the back-pro- jections of past historians who were simply retelling varia- tions of the same story, placing them back in time and substantiating them with faked documents.”

    “By this reasoning, classical antiquity never existed, and the Russian empire becomes identical with the Mongolian empire. Russian peasants and Mongolian conquerers are transformed into the peasant and warrior caste of a single empire, and for- eign invasions of Russian cities are construed as occasional punishments of cities that failed to pay the tributes they owed the Russian army. In one particularly free etymology, Fomenko derives the word “Mongol” from the Greek word megalos, big. The spiritual center of this empire was Constantinople, the birthplace of orthodox Christianity, whose later divisions spawned Judaism, Catholic Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism. Rome, according to Fomenko, was founded only in the fourteenth century. Clever heretics invented Antiquity during the Renaissance, either building the ancient ruins themselves or proclaiming unfinished buildings as ancient ruins.The Crusades were the West’s first attacks on the East. When they failed, the West plotted to sow discord and civil war between Russians and Turks, and used this disorder to support the Romanovs.”

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @ivan
    , @RichardTaylor
  188. Sparkon says:
    @Alden

    The Plague of Justinian occurred within the Dark Ages Cold Period, which was probably caused by volcanic eruptions in the 6h century.

    A mysterious fog plunged Europe, the Middle East, and parts of Asia into darkness, day and night—for 18 months. “For the sun gave forth its light without brightness, like the moon, during the whole year,” wrote Byzantine historian Procopius. Temperatures in the summer of 536 fell 1.5°C to 2.5°C, initiating the coldest decade in the past 2300 years. Snow fell that summer in China; crops failed; people starved. The Irish chronicles record “a failure of bread from the years 536–539.” Then, in 541, bubonic plague struck the Roman port of Pelusium, in Egypt. What came to be called the Plague of Justinian spread rapidly, wiping out one-third to one-half of the population of the eastern Roman Empire and hastening its collapse, McCormick says.
    […]
    At a workshop at Harvard this week, the team reported that a cataclysmic volcanic eruption in Iceland spewed ash across the Northern Hemisphere early in 536. Two other massive eruptions followed, in 540 and 547. The repeated blows, followed by plague, plunged Europe into economic stagnation that lasted until 640, when another signal in the ice—a spike in airborne lead—marks a resurgence of silver mining, as the team reports in Antiquity this week.

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/why-536-was-worst-year-be-alive

  189. @atzavar4

    The Celt Iberians were also there and gravestones in Port-u-gal have the earliest Celtic inscriptions known. Also of course, there were Phonecians, Greeks and Carthaginians on the coast before the Romans. Iberia was not simply occupied by Basques.

    Now I think of it. We again see (discussed elsewhere), a problem with the Gu- sound. Guadi/Wadi.

  190. Richard B says:
    @Big Daddy

    Well, shit, is anything for real?

    Great question.

    Given that this is a comment section, I’ll offer a short answer.

    Or, as short as I can make it.

    And the short answer is,

    Yes. Some things are for real.

    And what is real about history is that history is not about events of the past.

    It never has been and never will be.

    Why?

    Because past events are inaccessible.

    Of course, humans can’t live without a sense of the past.

    Maybe amoeba and communists can live that way. But humans can’t.

    That’s why we need history.

    So then, what is history about?

    History is about documents and artifacts in the present.

    Either the present of the writer, or reader.

    In both cases the documents are interpreted, for a reason.

    We live in an interpreted world.

    You can measure the extent of an historian’s bias by their knowledge of this obvious fact.

    If they don’t know it you better make sure your built-in shit detector is on.

    Otherwise, you’re going to get taken for a ride.

    If an historian knows this, but ignores it, hoping the reader won’t notice, then they’re corrupt and should be drummed out of academia forever.

    If they don’t know it then they can learn it and respond accordingly.

    But if they don’t know it and actually call themselves revisionist then they are the punchline to their own joke, which is them.

    Case in point.

    This article.

  191. Perhaps the most absurd aside (it is no more than that) in this little endeavour is the claim that the Laocoon “might” be a forgery by Michelangelo.
    Absurd because:
    1) the reference is to a lone “summer lecturer” in 2005, clearly trying desperately to improve her career prospects (and failing), and
    2) because anyone with even the most rudimentary artistic sense can see immediately that the work shows no signs of similarity with either Michelangelo’s way with marble or his unique rapport with the male physique.
    It is clear that the author is simply throwing up smokescreens to get us used to the idea of uncertainly about the past. He doesn’t care of they hold water or not. They are not what this is all about, something dark which his later articles will reveal, I suspect equally ineffectively, weirdly entertaining though they be.

  192. 22pp22 says:
    @anon

    I have written an explanation of how Late Latin turned into Early Later in the comment section, where I have explained in unassailable detail why the author’s comments on the Latin language are indeed rubbish.

    Here is is again:

    We don’t have any sources written in what we could call pure Vulgar Latin.

    What we do have are inscriptions, graffiti and the errors made by the less well-educated among the Late Roman authors.

    The main differences between early Romance and Late Latin are easy to explain.

    1). The loss of final consonants especially m, s and t. This played havoc with the case endings of Latin nouns.

    The declension of dominus (master) is dominus, dominum, domini, domino, domino, domini, dominos, dominorum, dominis, dominis.

    If you remove the final consonants, most of the distinctions are lost and the case system becomes pointless.

    We find examples of this as early as the Pompeian graffiti.

    “Quisquis ama ualea, perea qui nosci amare” should be Quisquis amat ualeat, pereat qui nescit amare.

    2). Latin has an odd way of reporting speech. It is called the accusative and infinitive. You don’t say, “I said that I was true.” You say, “I said it to be true.” “He thought himself to be very unhappy.”

    The use of ‘that’ (quod) appears fairly early and displaces the accusative and infinitive.

    3). The main verb migrated to the front of the sentence during the long course of Roman history. The loss of case endings means that the position of words becomes all important in the sentence and has to be fixed. The verb can no longer float around.

    4). The loss of most forms for the passive. Amabo means I will love. Amabor means I will be loved. In the past tense Latin used a passive form amatus est consisting of the supine and the verb ‘to be.’ The verb ‘to be’ started being used in all the tenses and displaces the other passive forms. Thus you have the modern Spanish, Italian and Portuguese passive forms.

    Make these changes and Hey Presto, Late Latin turns into early Romance. No need for an invasion from Dacia.

    • Agree: Peter Akuleyev
    • Replies: @All we like sheep
  193. Truth3 says:

    So….

    How real are you?

  194. JackOH says:
    @V. K. Ovelund

    V. K., thanks, you’ve put a voice to my own attitude toward many of the articles here.

    Nevertheless, one needs authority-questioning articles like this. Authority is no longer believed

    No one believes anything any more. Any why should they?

    Yep, that’s about it.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  195. Mr. Anon says:
    @Wood Stove

    I think that perhaps you are a fake. Can you prove you exist?

    The fact that you take one anonymous article as being definitive proof of anything indicates how seriously your opinions ought to be taken.

    • Replies: @Wood Stove
  196. Denis says:

    This is the biggest bunch of nonsense I have ever read.

    • Replies: @Anon
  197. @FB

    Are you out of your mind? I do not do a work for me why I would do a work for you.
    I have read speeches in my own language so that would not help you.
    But In work of Jon E Lewis Rome you can find some.
    I was only referring to Rome personalities. If I catch somebody lying than that person is liar and liar
    lies about everything.

    • Replies: @FB
  198. Alden says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    A fascinating article from resilience. .Org But Colin Turnbull’s book has been refuted and exposed as completely made up. Of course the book refuting Turnbull could also be wring. I need to read the article again.

    It’s my belief that only the Mongol genocides of conquered peoples, and the Jew Bolshevik destruction of the Soviet Union were the only true collapses in the last 5,000 years.

    The overseas Chinese especially Taiwan and resilient Chinese in China itself preserved Chinese way of life even during the Red Guard era. The average European kept on trucking during the fall of Rome. The average European N African and mid easterner and the Balkan people’s just kept on trucking when Rome conquered and enslaved some of their populations.

    The Americans had their revolutions. But kept the English Spanish and Portuguese languages, laws and customs. USA American historians glorified England right up to about 1960 when Jew commies seized Academia, education and the teaching of history

    Collapse? Metal is the only real commodity? Consider California. Conservatives hate California and refuse to admit we’re the 6th largest economy of the world.

    So what happens if Silicon Valley, the entertainment industry, San Francisco finance and even the Asian container ships don’t come to our great international ports any more? And even if the entire population of Asia doesn’t want to immigrate to California and raise real estate prices to astronomical heights?

    We’ll still have the land and crops, timber animals and fish. We have millions of square miles of some of the best agricultural lands in the world. We have millions of acres of prime timber and hordes of deer raccoons other game, birds and fish to eat. Maybe we can even start killing Sea Otters again Ever tasted pheasant and abalone? To. Die. For. Los Angeles might revert to a treeless desert; good. But the state will be fine.

    America is not collapsing. It’s just changing. I might not like the change but that’s all it is changing.

    I like Henry Ford 1 s criticism of history. Ford’s thesis was that history was all about Kings and Queen and Popes but completely ignored technology, trades and merchants. I agree. Newton had theories but he wasn’t the unknown men who figured if one gear worked why not add another gear and then another to create modern technology. Or the unknowns who invented various forms of horse and mule tack and harnesses. Or the 1300s Italian Dr who invented a self aka auto propelled cart that operatesd by gears and pulleys.

    For instance, that BBC Versailles series on Netflix. I didn’t watch it when it first came out because of the pornography I don’t like it plus I was spending a lot of time with the kids and they were young. But the quarantine boredom drive me to it. March thru May I helped remodel a house but it’s done So I’m driven to streaming.

    Despite the porn, Versailles is authentic as far as it goes. And at least there is a mention of the Languedoc canal. But nothing about the canal system than connected all the rivers of France so people could travel from the Mediterranean to the Germanic principalities Switzerland and the Netherlands and west to east from the channel and Atlantic ports to Austria.

    As usual it’s mostly wars and mistresses and nothing about the industrial and commercial advances of 17 century France. I vacuumed up the wars kings queens popes enlightenment history as a kid. Like Henry Ford 1st, I wish there was more history of industry commerce and trades crafts and technology before 1700. It’s really more important than wars kings queens and religious upheavals.

    Orlov reminds me of the other Russian immigrant published on this site. An endless stream of conventional criticism of America and Americans.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  199. 22pp22 says:
    @Philip Owen

    I wish I spoke Welsh – the coolest-sounding language on earth. You would be surprised how often I have heard people speaking it in New Zealand.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  200. Alden says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    I think you’re right about Michelangelo’s men.

    They’re a bit flatter chested and less bulging body builder than the father in Lacoon. Look at the pectoral muscles of the authenticated Michelangelo’s , they’re all flatter than Lacoon. And Michelangelo’s boys are realistic thin boys, not small versions of grown men body builders like the Lacoon sons. And would Michelangelo have made the sons so much smaller? If he made them that small they’d have been realistic skinny children. Had he made them muscular they’d have been realistic late teen near the father’s size.

    The actual David and others in the museum have very defined but flatter muscles than the body builders of Lacoon and his sons. Check the pecs.

  201. FB says: • Website
    @Zarathustra

    In other words you have nothing…

    Thought so…

    The funny thing is I see a lot of people freaking out here…

    And making that even funnier is that this cast of characters so hot and bothered by this article, happens to be the usual pile of Unzian retards and reactionaries…

    This is in fact a very well written article by the standards of this website, on a relatively harmless issue pertaining to the obscure subject of antiquity…

    The author has brought to light some fascinating information about the fakery that is established fact in this field…

    And called into question a historical narrative that in fact does have a lot of gaps…only a fool would say the conventional narrative is airtight…it’s not…

    Archeology and anthropology are much more rigorous and serious sciences than so called ‘history’ and ‘humanities’ which are rife with mythology and unattested events and dates…

    Already we have seen archeology and anthropology demolishing plenty of bullshit that we used to accept as historical fact…that’s only going to continue and accelerate…

    And finally, I can only see very emotional objections here…including some even appealing to the so called ‘scriptures’ which is kind of scary…

    No one criticism here has any real strength, especially your own, since you cannot even begin to produce any kind of real evidence…

    • Replies: @GazaPlanet
  202. @FB

    You are an enigma to me. Are you purposely rude, or you do not understand the nuances of English Language?

  203. “Ancient Roman coins” are made in China

  204. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    authority has spent decades shredding trust, causing fairly reasonable Americans, for example, (i) to doubt the moon landings and (ii) to assume that vast sums of federal coronavirus relief money are being stolen. The proprietor here at The Unz Review has led many of his readers (iii) to question the Holocaust. Why not then (iv) to wonder whether classical history is fake?

    All four examples used to be the province of cranks.

    In the real world they still are the province of cranks. But on Unz Review (which attracts cranks, misfits, losers and crazies and has only the most tenuous connection with the real world) such ideas find an ready audience. Unz Review and lunatic asylums are congenial gathering places for conspiracy theorists and crackpots.

    • Troll: Ann Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  205. Lurker says:
    @Franz

    Their tactics favored hit/run, create ambuscades, and so on. The wall would have crimped their style.

    Maybe the wall was a base of operations – they spent their time patrolling, raiding north of the wall?

    • Replies: @Franz
  206. @atzavar4

    I took four years of Latin in high school, Spanish in Lower School and a year of French in High School. I can tell you it is plainly obvious that both Spanish and French are corrupted Latin.

    • Agree: Peter Akuleyev
    • Replies: @anon
  207. @N word sayer

    No Christian would believe this ridiculous “new chronology” or think it somehow preserves the notion of Christian Civilization. It is about destroying history, attempting to dilute the accurate conspiratorial view of history by conflating it and confusing it with crackpot notions . The Anti-Christian have been glossing over the Middle Ages for centuries now, that’s why we have “Middle Ages.” Of course, the Latter Day Leftist morons are now trying to topple the last 500 years too, because let’s face it, the “Dark Ages” are completely fascinating, in comparison to say the history of Haiti. Races in this world who can only ever aspire to cultural legacy at the level of Haiti are going to hate Europeans with their gloriously inspiring “Dark Ages” – and the subsequent rise of European Civilization over many hundreds of years.

  208. Anon[356] • Disclaimer says:
    @Denis

    Youre not alone. There are ruins in the Roman Forum that attest to ancient Rome’s existence, as well as aquaducts, sewers, and roads. Jugurtha of North Africa and Hannibal of Carthage were not figments of a medieval writer’s imagination, but real enemies of Rome that Gaius Marius and Cornelius Sulla defeated before Ceasar subdued Gaul and Britan. Im a little suprised this got on Ron’s site.

    • Replies: @Denis
  209. @FB

    Spoken like one of these subhuman leftists calling to dismantle museums. These alternative chronologists are absolute crackpots and fantasists, and I suspect the anthropologists and archaeologists would be aghast at having a clown speaking on their behalf and thereby damaging the reputations of their fields.

    • Replies: @FB
  210. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    I was always under the impression that the peculiarities of French stemmed from the influence of the Celtic/Gaulish languages on the Vulgar Latin spoken in the region.

    The big historical picture is uncontroversial: Western European populations practiced relatively sophisticated agriculture, mining, long-distance shipping and trading long before the arrival of the Indoeuropeans (Celtic and Germanic tribes).

    There are various theories as to what languages the pre-Indoeuropeans spoke. Certain features in Western European languages such as the “vigesimality” (20-based number systems) found in French and Danish appear to be relics from those pre-Indoeuropean tongues.

    Similarly, words such as ship, boat, North, South etc. appear to originate in the pre-Indoeuropean languages. This makes sense – the Indoeuropeans would not have had a maritime tradition when they arrived overland from the steppes.

    In France, the Romanized Celts soon adopted Latin as their main language starting in the Roman cities, and ultimately Gaulish died out entirely (Breton is the language of returnees from Cornwall). Major Germanic influences in vocabulary and grammar were brought by the Franks. Wars, famines, dynastic politics etc. brought further waves of Germanic speakers, particularly in the border areas. Detailed investigation of the French languages (including Occitan) shows how they evolved over time under the influence of these external drivers and following internal processes.

    BTW the characteristic guttural “r” sound of standard French and German may have evolved as a fashion that originated in Portugal and gradually spread east. Another theory is that this, too, is a pre-Indoeuropean relic.

    • Replies: @orionyx
  211. zimriel says:
    @syonredux

    Thanks for that.
    Another crank post at Unz, sigh.

  212. @Alden

    Alden, Europe also suffered a climate crisis during this period. It was unusually cold in Europe creating great hardship. How cold? It was a mirror image of the Medieval Warm Period, colder to the same degree as the Medieval Warm Period was warm, using the centuries before and after as a baseline. The Dark Ages and The Medieval Warm period were literally back to back. When the Dark Ages ended, the Medieval Warm Period began. The people of Europe were not stupid during The Dark Ages, just suffering under extreme climate stress. In Europe, The Medieval Warm Period was considered a paradise time with vineyards in northern locals that hadn’t seen grapes in centuries. It is important to stress that both The Dark Ages and The Medieval Warm period were localized to Europe, no other areas of the earth experienced this.

    • Replies: @Alden
  213. Poco says:
    @Alden

    I have an undergraduate degree in anthropology. I can attest to it’s utter enslavement to popular political pieties and service to leftist woke propaganda. Anyone who believes in it’s scientific accuracy or search for truth is a moron.

  214. orionyx says:
    @22pp22

    It’s embarrassing when someone with actual knowledge of the subject brings points like this to the discussion. Doing so quite demolishes the story, and bang go the film rights.
    Or not – I am sure this could still turn into a blockbuster with Morgan Freeman in all the major roles, and Whoopee Goldberg as Cleopatra. After all, it’s her turn.

  215. orionyx says:
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    The vocabulary of French is largely Latin with much German. But the soul – ah! that is pure Celtic, as is the vowel system.

  216. @22pp22

    In Romanian, the term for “head” is “cap”, neutral overall with singular male “(un) cap” and a feminine plural: “(doua) capete”. There is also the archaic “tzeasta”, which is derived from testa and which refers mostly to the skull of the head.

    • Thanks: 22pp22
  217. @anonymous

    No joke at all.

    The writer casts doubts about the reality of the Roman Empire in the first century, despite the evidence provided by the most thoroughly researched document in history, i.e. the Christian New Testament. That document clearly identifies actual names, places, and titles of many of the leaders and cities of the Roman Empire. The accuracy of Early Christian history is corroborated by Josephus and other Roman historians. Paul of Tarsus wrote letters to and from the imperial capital of Rome in Italy. He documented his journey from Palestine to Rome with stops in Crete and Malta. Fragments of early manuscripts dating from the second century a.d. still exist.

    Yet the writer suggests that all this Roman history is fiction. Now that is a joke.

  218. FB says: • Website
    @GazaPlanet

    Screw you, little GOOF…

    At least I have a field…what’s your ‘field’…[besides freaking out like a girly-man]…?

  219. anon[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bombercommand

    What about Italian? English was a secret language came from German and others like Russia and Slavic. Anglo Saxon etc…Gaelic sounds German to me.

    • Replies: @Bombercommand
  220. @Alden

    Yes, Orlov’s book was otherwise pedestrian. Borrowed it, read the first few chapters, recitations of the difficulties Russians endured in shift from USSR to FSU. Will Americans face similar experiences? Not similar enough to make Orlov’s suggestions useful, except, Buy a boat, learn to sail.

    Your optimism about the state of USA / California is important; thanks. I travel a lot over a very narrowly circumscribed route but even in that small circuit, I am continually amazed at the beauty and plenitude of this land, and so much of it still in-the-raw. I’ve also contemplated the extent to which enormous human energy and talent have been put to building on and creating of this land, and I fear that the revolution that decidedly evil people are plotting intends the Firebombing of Germany 2.0: their goal is to incinerate the inhabitants of built USA while retaining that which they — we — built.

    Much in comment #158 to agree with:
    https://www.unz.com/article/how-fake-is-roman-antiquity/#comment-3998929

    Philosophical, humanistic Greco-Roman paganism was always the most dangerous competitor to Christianity, and the rediscovery in the late Medieval period of so many previously lost works – both thanks to Arabic and Greek translation movements that predated 1453, and because of the flood of Greek scholars fleeing Islam to Italy after 1453 – did permanent damage to Christianity that it still has not recovered from.

    The American (& European, & esp. British) versions of Christianity are played out, empty shells, in desperate need of total renovation — or tear-down. As foundations for a thriving culture and society, Ancient Greek history and myths, and Renaissance and Enlightenment thinking are far more inspiring and motivating toward Becoming than all the works of Revelation.

    Walther Grundmann had the right idea (for the German people): We will define our own god, our own religious beliefs melded with our own mythologies and historical understanding.

    PS Why o why is that laurel-wreathed Roman not wearing a mask!!

    • Replies: @Alden
  221. orionyx says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    The Bible is nothing if not absolutely as pellucid and unambiguous as it is trustworthy, factual and reliable. Using quotations from it to support one side or another of a debate on forgeries is moronic.

  222. @Weston Waroda

    I stumbled on a Romanian documentary. It seems there are at least a few academics in Romania that might agree it is possible that Romanian didn’t derive from Latin, rather, Latin is derived from Dacian, or, at least derived from a common ancestor of Dacian and Latin. So, I’m not so sure I was right about a Latin origin for Romanian. More investigation is needed.

    However, while the documentary raises a lot of questions, but I have one myself. The Romans themselves noticed the points of similarities between their language and Greek. If Dacian and Latin were derived from a common ancestor, then I would have expected the Romans to have noticed the similarity, closer, much closer, than Latin to Greek. Where is this evidence? Where are the Latin speakers that noticed they could more or less communicate with the Dacians?

    The documentary cites no evidence like this, although it gives prominence to a declaration by Trajan that when he invaded Dacia he entered the halls of his ancestors, there’s a complicated explanation involving Geto-Dacians and Thracians, who are connected. I still think it is more likely Romanian is descended from Latin. Perhaps the influence of a prestige language is part of the key, but, I don’t know enough to say for sure. Still it is an intriguing question, answered only in part.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @22pp22
  223. Alden says:

    Thank you Ron, for this very interesting article. Look forward to the next one and discussions.

  224. @FB

    You obviously didn’t even read the article…the existence of engineering and architectural structures does not necessarily PROVE the stories attached to those real structures, including when they were built and by whom…

    Leading off, are we, by providing more definitive evidence you are afflicted with a fatal cognitive deficit disorder that prevents you from understanding even simple English.

    Of course I read the article because my comment started with the following cite from the article:

    “As for your query: ‘For instance, a comparison between Marcus Aurelius’ bronze equestrian statue (formerly thought to be Constantine’s), with, say, Louis XIV’s, makes you wonder: how come nothing remotely approaching this level of achievement can be found between the fifth and the fifteenth century?)’”

    Thus with his question he was posing as the answer that if there was such a huge gap between when those equestrian statues were cast. Does it then not mean that Aurelius’ statue was cast at that much later time that he was presenting as evidence validating and substantiating his claim that the manuscripts he is analyzing that purported to date from an equally earlier time were also produced at a much later time like the statue of Aurilius?

    That was the point he was making, no? If it wasn’t, what was the point of even raising it.

    So let me dumb down my remark so you can get it, maybe. It as merely to suggest that as I cite below my comment there was an alternative explanation that could account for why statues like Aurilius’ were not cast until hundreds of years later:

    Let me hypothesize the interregnum was somehow due to the “dark ages” that eclipsed Europe during that period after debauchery destroyed Rome’s moral fiber, its conscripted legions fell apart as the US Army did in Vietnam, its slave based production system collapsed, and the invading “Barbarians” from the north descended on Western part of the Empire and transformed it into a land of chaos.

    Thus nobody during that period had the knowledge, inclination, resources, etc. to cast such magnificent statues that required a high degree of craftsmanship and metallurgical knowledge.

    Contrary to your babbling, I’d say that was a pretty succinct summary of the dark ages that descended on Europe after the “Fall” of the western Empire.

    Now you could have taken issue with my conclusion on rational grounds such as by subscribing to the authors notion that the gap between when those statues were produced was accounted for by the Aurilius statue having actually been cast centuries later than in Roman times and closer to when the Louis XIV was cast to explain the absence of similar castings during those centuries.

    Or you could have postulate some other explanation.

    Instead, you went with the following feeble rejoinder by which you entered the race for who is the brain dead imbecile of the universe:

    try to be a little less verbose…I have never seen anyone that uses so many words to say so little…

    But as the old philosopher said, that’s not what’s really bothering you is it?

    What’s really bothering you are the following comments I made that liken the forged manuscripts the author describes to the holohoax:

    “I would also point out that referring to the manuscripts you analyze as “forgeries” gives me pause about the logic and evidence on which you argue the case for the simple reason that for there to be a “forgery” of any kind requires some kind of “genuine original.” Thus if, as you say, the manuscripts are forgeries, what are the originals and how close are the forgeries to the originals. If not forgeries, then they are fabrications such as the holohoax. And if what we have come to know as Roman history is like the holohoax, what then is the real history of people who left behind such artifacts as aqueducts running dozens if not to as far as a hundred miles that still work and other statues and buildings throughout Europe?

    “Let me suggest that your notion of forged manuscripts rings truer than you imagine. For just suppose that clever forgers were aware that powerful men would pay lots of money to gain possession of allegedly ancient manuscripts written to support current historical dogmas and the interests of the then powerful. The forgers indeed acquired original documents that didn’t completely comport to the prevailing political dogmas of the powerful. So they modernized the history by making stuff up that they sprinkled into the falsification they created based on some original documents.”

    As the old philosopher said, that’s what’s bothering you, isn’t it.

    For if forgeries suggest the presence of genuine originals, then the alleged Czarist forgery of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion suggest the existence of a genuione protocol authored by those elders, but if not forgeries they are fabrications. And then, heaven forbid, if Roman history could be fabricated as the author suggests, then why not the holohoax tale?

    Is that what’s really bothering you about those comments? And is that why you didn’t even dare broach the subject.

    So a hasbarah goon is exposed again.

    Now crawl back into the slime pit you inhabit.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Alden
  225. Malla says:
    @Alden

    Wasn’t Frank Firangi etc a general term for European all over the Mid East, N Africa Central Asia , E Asia India etc? I believe it was.

    Al beruni specifically meant the Franks. This was written a 1000 years ago, when Firangi really meant only Franks for the Middle Easterners fighting European crusaders. Firangi meaning any White person is a much later concept. From India to Thailand any White person including Brits or Russians can be called Firangs.

    And since Rome was in Europe, why would he say, the European Romans came from the land of Europe to Europe? it makes no sense. It seems he meant they came from the land of the Franks which could mean Gaul or Germania or Gaul + Germania region.

  226. Malla says:

    Dacian mercenaries were quite common in Egypt.

  227. Malla says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    Check my response : Post No. 228

  228. Seraphim says:
    @Alden

    In actual fact the Apostles went everywhere appointing bishops for the newly formed Christian communities, before heading for Rome, where they were forcibly taken to (Paul). In any case it was not Peter who founded the Church at Rome and he was not its ‘first bishop’. This is the ‘Roman’ falsification of the primitive history of the Church, an ‘invented tradition’ with grievous consequences.
    “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (Matthew 28:18-20).

    • Replies: @Kapyong
  229. @anon

    Since I did not study Italian, I made no comment on Italian. Since Ancient Rome IS Italy, the conclusion is obvious. As an English speaker, the core of English is clearly protoGermanic, but much older than German or Dutch. The English word “Bough” (pronounced “bow”, as in bow and arrow) is interesting as the Japanese word Bo(pronounced “bow”, as in bow and arrow) both have the same meaning, a stick of wood, or a branch of a tree, same thing. Similarly the Japanese word “Ringu” usually translated “ring”(more accurately ” any rounded thing) is identical in sound and meaning to the English/German word “ring”, which means any rounded thing. Did the Japanese get Bo and Ringu from the Ainu? I am very interested in the Hyperborean Hypothesis, a continuous range of Caucasian People along a latitude line from Ireland to Japan.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @RodW
    , @RodW
  230. @Grahamsno(G64)

    The surviving bottom portion of the tablet was discovered in 1528 by a draper in his vineyard

    This type of scenario is par the course, and is repeated many, many times.

  231. @dfordoom

    In the real world they still are the province of cranks. But on Unz Review (which attracts cranks, misfits, losers and crazies and has only the most tenuous connection with the real world) such ideas find an ready audience. Unz Review and lunatic asylums are congenial gathering places for conspiracy theorists and crackpots.

    Acknowledged. A lot of people agree with you. I used to, too. Am not so sure, any longer.

    I shall not ask you whether you take me for (a) a crank, (b) a misfit, (c) a loser or (d) a crazy! I may be all of these, for all I know. Time will tell.

    Meanwhile, as far as conspiracy theorists go, I take your meaning, but how many lies has the public been told by persons the public should have been able to trust? Are our children not fed a steady diet of distortions in school? Did CNN not go on and on and on about the Russia hoax? That didn’t stop Exxon Mobil or Marriott (enterprises presumably run by sober persons) from advertising on CNN, as far as I could see.

    What about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman the white Hispanic? Did that build trust? Should I believe Nancy Pelosi more when she is standing upright or when she is kneeling on the stone floor of the Capitol rotunda?

    How often during the past 30 years have I been intimidated not to notice that white people seem to be substantially and somewhat predictably different from blacks? Why was I not allowed to complain decades ago when my comradely workplace was turned inside out by the forcible introduction of women into it? And then one of the younger women started sleeping with the boss, and no one was supposed to mind.

    White fertility craters. Nonwhite foreigners are brought in by the millions to replace us because Diversity Is Our Strength. Everything is always somehow the white man’s fault. At some point, it begins to drive one half mad.

    The half that is not mad (or perhaps the half that is mad) then starts asking questions.

    Was I a crank in 2001 when I wondered aloud why the George W. Bush administration responded to 9/11 by increasing Middle Eastern immigration and, simultaneously, responded to 9/11 by ordering searches of my mother’s shoes at the airport? Am I a crank now when I worry that my son, presently in U.S. military service, may be slain in some war for Israel?

    Am I supposed to believe that James Alex Fields, Jr., and colleagues got fair trials after Charlottesville?

    As a certain philosopher named George Floyd recently put it, “I can’t breathe!”

    If you and I and our fellow citizens have not been sold out on some level, then what do you think has happened to us? At some point, even allowing for the normal variety of human personalities around us, the untoward coïncidences begin to add up.

    But, yes, I get it. No one wants to be judged a conspiracy theorist. I say it without irony: I do not wish to be judged a conspiracy theorist any more than you do. If you will keep your distance from the overly credulous (and maybe that includes me), I can hardly blame you, but this does not change the fact that something in our society is out of place.

    My view is that public discourse controlled, directed and edited by sober, conventional persons has failed. I do not know why it has failed. I wish that it hadn’t, but it has; so, now, something like The Unz Review has got to be tried.

    And if the price of trying it is that we get to listen to some colorful ideas from time to time, so be it.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  232. orionyx says:
    @Anonymous

    The gutteral ‘r’ of German spread from the Prussian court, who were imitating Voltaire – whose only other achievement was to have thought he existed.

    • LOL: Old Palo Altan
  233. @Julian of Norwich

    For the thesis to be correct, we would have to accept that the forgers were all literary geniuses

    Literary geniuses in Italy during the Renaissance? Unpossible!

    • LOL: Iris, FB
  234. Iris says:

    Many thanks to the author(s) and the UR for this fascinating and well-researched article. It is great mix of intellectual rigour and non-conventional thinking.

    I look forward to reading Parts 2&3.

  235. FB says: • Website
    @the shadow

    Too long…didn’t read…

    Try to express yourself without a lot of unnecessary and long winded introductions etc…

    I don’t have any problem in considering your retarded musings, per se, but I’m not going to spend 20 minutes while you flatulate like a broken accordion…

    • Replies: @the shadow
  236. songbird says:

    IIRC, Oswald Spengler though that a lot of early Greek and Roman history was made-up.

    For the Greeks, I think it was nearly everything before Thucydides. And for the Romans, I think it was everything before 200 BC or so. Seems crazy to me, but I am not much of a classical historian.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
  237. Articles like this ruffle feathers; but raise valid questions nonetheless. Inventions, distortions, demonizations, forgeries, lies and what not have always been part of the modus operandi of past empires and their real and/or spiritual descendants to date. It’s about ideology.

    In the 19th century for instance, the (eugenic) Anglo-Saxon ruling class claimed the ancient Greeks and the Romans were Germans. [1] The historical Eastern migration was replaced with an invented one from the North. The Near Eastern people (Canaanites (Phoenicians), Egyptians, et al.) who were instrumental in the development of the Western world [2] were erased. Ancient versus Aryan model. [3]

    Bottom line: Ruling classes write History. The rest is history.

    [MORE]

    _____

    [1]

    “What is interesting, however, is the following statement: according to Chamberlain, the Romans and the Greeks, the founding fathers of our European civilization, were indeed Germans. The Germanic giants from the forests of the north were “blood from their blood and spirit from their spirit” and, as such, “the true heir of the Romans and of the Greeks”.

    In very ancient times, Germanic tribes had come from the north to colonize the south. They settled down in Greece and Rome, enjoying the benefits of cultural photosynthesis, thanks to the sun and mild climate of the Mediterranean. While their cousins who had stayed in the north still ate raw meat and lived in caverns, the Germans of the South―that is to say, the Greeks and the Romans―ate healthy food and created civilisation. They then left testimonies of their genius in immaculate and pristine temples that were currently used, in the 19th century, to demonstrate the superiority of white mankind.

    This idea was borrowed by Chamberlain from many racist historians and theoreticians of the time. To prove the excellence of Germanic blood, scientists and race specialists had argued, since the 1830’s, that every light came from the North, and not from the East. This is summed up by Chamberlain who, contrary to Hegel who wrote “Ex oriente lux”, pretends that “Ex septentrione lux”: the beacon of civilization lies in the north with the white Germanic race.

    “From Humanism to Nazism: Antiquity in the Work of Houston Stewart Chamberlain”, Johann Chaputot
    https://journals.openedition.org/miranda/6680

    [2] “The Phoenicians and the Formation of the Western World”, John C. Scott
    https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2047&context=ccr

    “Phoenicians: The Quickening Of Western Civilization”, John C. Scott
    https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2112&context=ccr

    [3]

    “Bernal suggests an explanation of ancient Greek development in terms of what he calls “the ancient model.” Classical, Hellenistic, and later, pagan Greeks from the fifth century B.C. to the fifth century A.D. believed their ancestors had been civilized by Egyptian and Phoenician colonization and the later influence of Greek study in Egypt. Up to the eighteenth century A.D., Egypt was seen as the fount of all “Gentile” philosophy and learning, including that of the Greeks, and it was believed that the Greeks had managed to preserve only a part of this wisdom. Bernal suggests that the sense of loss that this created, and the quest to recover the lost wisdom, were major motives in the development of science in the seventeenth century.

    Bernal argues that the ancient model was accepted by historians from antiquity till the nineteenth century, and was rejected then only for anti-Semitic and racist reasons. He sees the Egyptian and Phoenician influence on ancient Greeks as beginning in the first half of the second millennium B.C. He concludes that Greek civilization is the result of the cultural mixtures created by these colonizations and later borrowings from across the eastern Mediterranean. These borrowings from Egypt and the Levant occurred in the second millennium B.C. or in the thousand years from 2100 to 1100 B.C., which Bernal suggests is the period during which Greek culture was formed! “The Ancient Greeks, though proud of themselves and their recent accomplishments, did not see their political institutions, science, philosophy or religion as original. Instead they derived them – through the early colonization and later study by Greeks abroad – from the east in general and Egypt in particular.”

    […]

    The Aryan model, an alternative theory about the development of the ancient Greeks, first appeared in the first half of the nineteenth century. It denied any influence of Egyptian settlements and expressed doubt about a role for the Phoenicians. An extreme version of this model was propounded during the height of anti-Semitism in Europe in the 1890s, and then in the 1920s and 1930s; this particular explanation denied even the Phoenician cultural influence.” According to the Aryan model, there had been an invasion from the north, an invasion not described by ancient writers, which had overcome the existing pre-Hellenic culture. Greek civilization was seen as the result of the mixture of the Indo-European speaking Hellenes and the older peoples over whom they ruled.

    “The Myth of Greek Ethnic ‘Purity’”, John Shea
    http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/greekmyth.html”

  238. @vot tak

    Why the anonymous nick instead of using one’s real name

    Point well taken, Mr. Tak.

    • LOL: Haruto Rat
  239. Iris says:
    @Tom67

    French doesn´t resemble Occitan more than any other. There is a veritable gulf between the two. In fact French is in a league of its own

    Ma native language is French. I picked up Spanish and Italian really quickly and naturally, in a matter of weeks, same for Occitan which is still used by fringe French music bands such as Fabulous Troubadours. Portuguese sounds a little more “remote”, but Latin remains a completely foreign territory. Although I was brought up by a mother who was fluent and used it daily for her work, I was never able to learn any of it. I agree with the author.

    • Replies: @ariadna
  240. Alden says:
    @Bombercommand

    Thanks, I always assumed the early medieval warm period was all over the earth. Any theories as to why it was confined to Europe?

    I never knew there was a cold period just prior to the warm period, must have been 400-600 AD? Or even earlier?

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @Bombercommand
  241. vot tak says:

    “The Italian Romans were Etruscans from Lydia in Asia Minor.”

    The Italian Romans and the Etruscans were seperate peoples with very different languages and cultures.

    See:

    Italic languages

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/Italic-languages/Venetic

    See also:

    The Origins of the Etruscans

    https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/etruscans.htm

    The Etruscans for a while dominated the region around Rome, and some of their culture was passed on. This explains the Roman and Etruscan cultural simularities. The Etruscan language is not related to Indi-European languages and has not been conclusively related to another language, yet.

    One inportant difference between the Etruscans and the Romans is the Etruscans had a strong seafaring element to their culture, like the Greeks and Phoenicians. The early Romans were mainly landlubbers who had to learn from others how to build ships. If the Romans were Etruscans, they would have not lost that important seafaring element in their culture.

    The Latin/Italic languages themselves are more closely related to the Germanic and Celtic than to the Greek groups.

  242. Ron Unz says:

    Well, since this long article has generated lots of readership and a couple of hundred comments, I might as well contribute my own two cents.

    I’m certainly not a Roman history specialist, but the theory being advanced seems *exceptionally* implausible to me, basically just amounting to total crackpottery.

    Livy’s histories run something like 500,000 words, and adding the various other Roman historians probably raises the total to several million words, which together produce a fairly consistent and comprehensive history of the Roman Republic and Roman Empire. It seems total lunacy to suggest all of this massively detailed—and self-consistent!—historical record was fabricated a thousand years later by a few Renaissance swindlers, who also somehow managed to make it reasonably fit the huge numbers of inscriptions, coins, and other archaeological evidence.

    Just imagine how many years it would have taken some inventive swindler to simply plot-out those centuries of totally-invented Roman history and then write so many millions of words describing it. The task would have to be the greatest fictional undertaking in all human history. So why would any sensible swindler have wasted time on such difficult nonsense when it would be so much more cost-effective to sell gullible marks the Philosopher’s Stone or pieces of the True Cross?

    I’m not a Roman history expert, but I did have a background in Hellenic and Hellenistic studies, and during in the 1980s I published several articles in the leading Classical History academic journals, including a couple of pieces that proposed radical revisions of established Classical chronologies. Here are the links:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/the-chronology-of-the-pentekontaetia/

    https://www.unz.com/runz/the-chronology-of-the-elean-war/

    However, my revisions were far less “radical” than claiming that Rome never existed, and anyone who bothers to read them will see that they were very closely argued based on a detailed analysis of the evidence of the sources.

    A somewhat more “radical” article of mine published around the same time argued that Alexander the Great had had younger brothers whom he murdered when he came to the throne. From what I’ve heard, I think it eventually became an accepted part of the historical scholarship:

    https://www.unz.com/runz/alexander-s-brothers/

    One problem with zealous “conspiracy theorists” is that they tend to accept or propose all sorts of wild “conspiracy theories,” even those for which the very scanty supporting evidence is vastly outweighed by the evidence on the other side.

    • Agree: Seraphim, the shadow, Robjil
    • Replies: @Alden
    , @22pp22
    , @Denis
    , @dfordoom
  243. Kapyong says:
    @Seraphim

    “In actual fact the Apostles went everywhere appointing bishops for the newly formed Christian communities, before heading for Rome, where they were forcibly taken to (Paul). ”

    Oh please – that’s not a fact – it’s just faithful Christian belief, based on nothing more than faithful Christian stories.

    Do we really have to put up with Christian preaching here ?
    That’s the second one now.

    • Troll: Seraphim
  244. @songbird

    IIRC, Oswald Spengler though that a lot of early Greek and Roman history was made-up.

    You do not recall correctly. Oswald Spengler thought no such thing.

    What he said was that the Apollonian Civilization (i.e. the Greco-Roman cultural sphere from the Mycenaean primitive age to the fall of Rome) was so ahistorical in its outlook that its notions about “the past” were subtly combined with the general mythology. He contrasted this with out own Faustian civilization which is historical through and through and stores up information such that we know the exact dates and times and places of things that have happened for hundreds of years.

    The point was that the idea of a grand historical sweep of events with its “movements” and “periods” would have been as foreign to a Greek mind as it is natural to a Western mind, but this is quite different from saying that they made stuff up.

    • Replies: @songbird
  245. FB says: • Website
    @Weston Waroda

    Thanks for that excellent documentary…

    The introduction states the problems Romanians have with the accepted ‘historical’ narrative…the continuity of Dacians on ‘these lands…’

    …they struggle to convince us that Dacians were just some primitives erased from history by the civilizing Roman Empire, and that we Romanians are the descendants of Rome.

    Is this the actual reality?

    Or is perhaps Romania’s history based on a long stream of falsification of facts?

    Dr Napoleon Savscu, director and founder of the Dacia Revival International Society

    The fact that we are not actually the descendants of Rome, certainly intrigues many people, and especially the world of science who wants proof.

    For the rest of us it’s actually simple. and this simplicity is: the Romans arrived, they conquered 14 percent of the territory of Dacia…

    And overnight, not only on the territory conquered for only 100 years, learn Latin perfectly, actually forgetting their own language, but also the rest of the 86 percent of Dacia who didn’t even know the Romans invaded, miraculously forget their language and start speaking Latin…

    Where then does the similarity of the Romanian language to Latin come from…?

    Recent Paleogenetics studies, along with certain historical sources, point to the following explanation: the Dacian language could be the continuation of an older language that originated Vulgar Latin as well.

    In other words, the Dacian and Latin languages could be sisters, and in such a case, no Romanization would be needed in order for the Dacian people to understand and speak Latin.

    So Romanians themselves are starting to question the admittedly absurd-sounding idea that they just somehow, uniquely among the many various, Roman-ruled ethnicities, just dumped their language and traditions…

    Clearly that makes no sense at all…

    I will be adding more excerpts from this documentary…here it is again in its entirety…

  246. Alden says:
    @SolontoCroesus

    Just would like to mention that the much heralded Arab translations were done by Christian Arab monks in their Christian monasteries. All Haroun al Raschid did was grant money to the Christian Syrian monks to continue the preservation work they’d been doing since about 300AD long before the Muslim conquest. Arab doesn’t not automatically mean Muslim, especially in medieval times.

    And guess where the remnants of the library of Alexandria finally; finished after centuries of fires mold and neglect in 900 AD under Caliph Haroun al Rashid are? The monastery of St Catherine in Egypt and the Vatican library in Rome.

    This author reminds me of the enlightenment propagandists. They were masons secularists anti clericals and atheists. Their deal was the the northern Barbarians destroyed glorious Greece and Rome , the greatest civilizations ever Then under the evil ignorant superstitious influence of Christianity , Europe went to sleep for 1,100 years between 400 and 1500

    Then suddenly in 1500 a magical renaissance happened. The enlightenment and other historians went on and on about the glories of Roman building , roads bridges aqueducts. But never mentioned most of the actual work in both Greece and Rome was actually done by slaves and a very powerful dictatorial government.

    I’ve read that medieval governments objected to major road building because it would make invasion easier. Makes sense.

    Another point, the Donation of Constantine was a forgery. But that does not mean all the other documents mentioned were forgeries. The Donation forgery was for a very specific purpose.

    To give legal credence to the fact that after 325 AD the RC church acquired and developed a lot of territory in Italy. It headed off conquests of church lands by Italian warlord nobles. Avoided church money spent on defensive armies. Avoided bloodshed and devastation of farms and towns. All very practical sensible reasons to forge the Donation.

    But forging or just creating the history of Rome?

    I can see a 15th century Italian scholar/ forgers forging some documents for money and glory. But creating the entire history of Rome from 700 BC to 412 AD just doesn’t make sense.

    Once more, any historian writing about the period 450 to 650 without mentioning the Justinian plague and the effects of the depopulation it caused is not a historian. He’s a theorist. Chroniclers and historians didn’t survive the Justinian Plague.

    We know a lot about Europe after 700 AD including the numerous Black Plague episodes because writers historians public health clerks other government clerks and medical practitioners survived to write the history.

    • Agree: ivan
  247. anon[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bombercommand

    Italian, French and Spanish are almost the same language, pronunciation makes the difference in the writing, but that should tell you something.

    • Agree: Bombercommand
  248. @First Millennium Revisionist

    If you say so. (It was the meaningless “almost by definition” part that really convinced me.

  249. @TomSchmidt

    The Eocene Epoch is a geological epoch that lasted from about 56 to 33.9 million years ago. Do you clowns know when the Beridians got here….? The Bering Straight lasted from 30,000 to 16,000 years ago!!!!! Early man definitely wiped out Megafauna but for Godsakes what in the Hell are you talking about!

    Unz sure doesn’t require an IQ test to comment here or some of you might be in trouble. Perhaps you guys are drinking too much. The woman’s thesis is a fucking comedy. Learn something about basic geologic time and Anthropology.

    Now I’ll think I’ll have drink…holy cow..

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @FB
  250. Alden says:
    @Alba -

    There’s a story that the Turks followed a sacred gray wolf from E Asia all the way to the Mid East and Byzantium Their totem led them away from the conquering genocidal mongols east of their territory to their own conquests in the west. The Muslim Turks kept the sacred gray wolf and other traditions.

  251. Alba - says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    Not germanic per se but the indo european are the founding rock of the graeco roman world , the reason the theory( now confirmed linguistically and genetically) gained influence in the 19 century is because of the lisguistic comparative develoment made only posible by the british expansionism .

    A genetic study published the last years covering thousands of years of the italian peninsula show us how in the republican era italic tribes clustered genetically between north italian and frenchs is in the imperial era when a masive number of inmigrants and slaves made rome cluster with the levant and more easternly greeks basically what is happening now

    https://ibb.co/J58HftL

    • Replies: @Hiram of Tyre
  252. Alden says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    The article’s similar to the absurd collection of anti White European civilization and White peoples lies ; the book Black Athena written by Jew professor Bernal of Cornell U. Bernal claims Greek, Roman Egyptian and even Chinese civilizations were created by magical negroes straight out of Congo.

  253. anonymous[751] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alfred

    The art world is a HUGE rabbit hole of forgeries. Classical sculptures, Renaissance paintings, you name it. There’s just a ton of money at stake for people not to do it even at great expense and effort.

    This is yet another area where they handwave to the laymen (inlcuding me) that they have “scientific tests” that can prove or disprove authenticity. Seems reasonable and seems like something we want to believe.

    Look into this guy’s story. Fascinating stuff and a genuinely talented guy. But he figured out what scientific tests were going to be done and acted accordingly (canvas, paints, etc.). He didn’t get caught by scientific or art historian “experts” but because his dealer ratted him out when he got busted.

    https://tonytetro.com/la-times-profile/

    lol, this man forged a Ferrari from scratch. Museum curators were not a huge challenge, I guess.

    The Getty *wanted* to believe they were acquiring priceless antiquities (for a price!) so they did believe it. If you remember that story it turned out they may have been a bit gullible.

    • Thanks: Alfred, FB
  254. There are ruins in the Roman Forum that attest to ancient Rome’s existence

    It could be build at a later time with intent to imitate Antiquity architecture style. Or else that was just their actual architecture style that we moderns think was ancient.

    Evidence of the Romans crossed the Atlantic and founded the colony of Columbia in North America, or were they built at a later time in the Antiquity idiom for stylistic reasons?

    [MORE]

  255. @22pp22

    Your quote is in an artificial literary style that obscures how non-Romance spoken Romanian actually is. Words like “oficial”, “administrativ”, “international” were all borrowed from French in the 19th century in a conscious effort to “relatinize” the language. A lot of common every day language is quite slavic. “Da” means yes, “bolnav” = sick, “citi”= read, etc. “she loves my friend” =“ ea iubeste pe prietenul meu”. Compare the latter to Russian “ona liubit moego priatelja” , Italian – ella ama il mio amico, and Latin – ea amat amicum meum. Hard to see Romanian as the source of Latin, it appears to be a Dalmatian dialect of Romance intermixed with a lot of Slavic, possibly borrowed even before Romance speakers migrated to Moldova and Wallachia from the Adriatic.

    • Thanks: 22pp22
    • Replies: @tiami
  256. Seraphim says:
    @James O'Meara

    That shows that Fomenko’s lunacy has deeper roots, and one would not wonder that it originated in the same cesspool of ‘restitutionism’, ‘revivalism’, ‘pentecostalism’ sub products of the anti-traditional ‘historyless’ Protestantism which flooded America, where ‘Mormonism’ was invented by the madman swindler Joseph Smith, who fabricated a ‘true’ history of Christianity, allegedly revealed by the Angel Moroni (very appropriate name for all the believers of ‘Mormonism’) known as the “Book of Mormon”. It is no surprise that the fakers think of all others as fakers.

  257. @FB

    The obvious answer is that Romanian speakers showed up in Dacia from the south many centuries after Romans had ceded the territory to the Huns and Slavs, and are basically the descendants of Italian shepherds looking for better pasture and safety. This doesn’t fit either the West European romantic notion of finding descendants of “lost Roman legions” out in the wild lands of Orthodox Europe, nor does it fit in the Romanian nationalist narrative that those lands have “always” been Romanian, but it fits the historical and linguistic facts better than the notion that somehow a few Roman soldiers kept the language alive over centuries of invasions when even in truly Romanized areas like North Africa and Britain, Latin succumbed pretty quickly under foreign onslaughts.

    • Replies: @FB
  258. @Epaminondas

    Yess and Mommsen is probably the only Historian to win the Nobel Prize for literature oh sorry the bete noire of this site Churchill won it also but Mommsen was actually a real Historian. Thanks for the mention. I have read a volume of his History on Rome and I plan to read the full work. It’s telling that the author of this article has chosen to ignore such a giant.

  259. Meme for this this debate:

    [MORE]

  260. We know the “ignorance” of the Middle Ages was exaggerated. There was more technology available in the year 1300 than in the year 300. And also, they bathed in Medieval times! That’s another lie.

    I’m sure Rome existed, I don’t think the author disputes that. But as to what it was really like, that’s a fascinating question to me. It was a far bloodier place than most of think we know. Over half of all Emperors died by violence while in office. Think about that.

    We know the Renaissance crowd had a grudge against Christianity and the “proles” of their day and wanted to portray the Ancients as far superior, so keep that in mind.

    Remember something else: intellectuals told us Greek statues were white, without color, in order to appear austere. That turned out to be totally wrong. They were painted up. So, we’ve gotten a lot of things wrong.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @dfordoom
  261. Alden says:
    @runeulv

    Reason there’s no record of horse breeding is because horse breeders didn’t keep written records or if they did they weren’t carefully preserved in some rare library. Horses and other livestock were bred for various purposes. Different sizes stamina speed wool and milk production.

    Much more important than big horses for knights was big really big horses for hauling freight wagons. Or tough little donkeys who could live on little food but still work. The mongol Calvary horses were known to be small compared to European horses as early as Attila the Hun cerca 400AD. The Mongol breeders didn’t write about horse breeding, they just did it.

    As did the men who invented stirrups and all the horse and mule tack that turned those animals into functional workers for farming and numerous forms of transportation from a fast sprinter small horse for a small 13 14 yr old boy courier to a Percheron that could pull a wagon load of freight all day. Just because it wasn’t written down and preserved doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. And it was the anonymous unknown men who worked with their hands who did it all. Not kings queens popes and philosophers

    The monks and nuns kept agriculture records. No one else did including the great landowners until early modern times.

  262. @Alba -

    Not germanic per se but the indo european are the founding rock of the graeco roman world , the reason the theory( now confirmed linguistically and genetically) gained influence in the 19 century is because of the lisguistic comparative develoment made only posible by the british expansionism .

    A genetic study published the last years covering thousands of years of the italian peninsula show us how in the republican era italic tribes clustered genetically between north italian and frenchs is in the imperial era when a masive number of inmigrants and slaves made rome cluster with the levant and more easternly greeks basically what is happening now

    https://ibb.co/J58HftL

    “Indo-European”, like “Aryan” are modern Anglo-Saxon-British inventions with no linguistic, genetic, cultural or scientific basis. It’s purely supremacist:

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-europeans-misappropri_b_837376

    https://medium.com/@atulsin/aryan-myth-impact-on-race-science-distortion-of-caste-ac855d15eee5

    https://medium.com/@subhashkak/the-death-of-proto-indo-european-2ba0df1cb2cd

    The development of the Western world (Ancient Greece and Rome) was not indigenous but the result of foreign influence – namely from the Near East through the Egyptians and the Canaanites (Phoenicians) — not “Indo-European”. I linked to John C. Scott’s academic reviews earlier. Here they are again:

    https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2047&context=ccr

    https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2112&context=ccr

    I don’t quite understand your ending sentence when you write “made rome cluster with the levant and more easternly greeks”. Long before Rome existed, the Canaanites (Phoenicians) dominated the entirety of the Mediterranean basin for about over a thousand years with a monopoly on sea routes. This was between circa 1200 BCE and circa 150 BCE. Prior to 1200 BCE, they dominated the eastern part of the region only going back to circa 3500 BCE. The Canaanites (Phoenicians) were the ones who started the slave-trade.

    • Agree: Seraphim
    • Replies: @Alba -
  263. @Not Raul

    Excellent. I was not aware of this case. Ptolemy’s “map”, which was only published in 1477 and not surpassed until 1570, is also most probably wrongly dated. Another obvious case of wrong datation is the “Antikythera mechanism”, an analogue computer used to predict astronomical positions and eclipses for calendar and astrological purposes decades in advance. It was retrieved from the sea in 1901 among wreckage from a shipwreck off the coast of the Greek island Antikythera. It is dated from the first or second century BC. It is a complex clockwork mechanism composed of at least 30 meshing bronze gears. Detailed imaging of the mechanism suggests that it had 37 gear wheels enabling it to follow the movements of the Moon and the Sun through the zodiac, to predict eclipses and even to model the irregular orbit of the Moon. According to Wikipedia: “The knowledge of this technology was lost at some point in Antiquity” and “works with similar complexity did not appear again until the development of mechanical astronomical clocks in Europe in the fourteenth century.”

    • Thanks: Not Raul
  264. @runeulv

    Excellent point. The kind Gunnar Heinsohn makes. I’ll present him in the third part. But if you don’t know him yet, you can check his conference on http://www.q-mag.org/gunnar-heinsohns-latest.html or his articles on https://malagabay.wordpress.com/?s=Heinsohn. He mentions ships in his 2015 article “How did so many 1st-3rd century Roman elements make it into the 8th-10th century Viking age?”

  265. @V. K. Ovelund

    If it is suggested that Justinian’s forger invented or fraudulently compiled a comprehensive, balanced system of law, with all the marks of experience and long use, this is an extraordinary claim.

    This is not what I’m suggesting. Justinian did compile those laws, but my guess here is that these laws had been made for the only Roman Empire that ever existed : the one we now call (wrongly) Byzantine. Please stay tuned for the next articles.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  266. Alden says:
    @Ron Unz

    Conventional wisdom is his mother Olympias killed off some of his half brothers. At least one survived, Ptolemy whom he made Pharaoh of Egypt. Olympias even barbecued Phillip’s and his wife Cleopatra’s baby daughter to death along with Phillip’s widow Cleopatra.

    Alexander and Olympias most probably arranged the killing of Phillip. It was most convenient, made sure Phillip would never have another son who might dispute Alexander’s inheritance

    Killing your sons half brothers was the best way to ensure your son would inherit. Then kill the Royal father when your son was old enough to rule but still follow Mother’s advice.

    Loved the article and comments. Thank you.

  267. @Alden

    The article’s similar to the absurd collection of anti White European civilization and White peoples lies ; the book Black Athena written by Jew professor Bernal of Cornell U. Bernal claims Greek, Roman Egyptian and even Chinese civilizations were created by magical negroes straight out of Congo.

    I am finding it hard to believe that you read Bernal’s three-volume “Black Athena”. His thesis is centered around a (primarily) Semitic* influence in the development of the Western world and not of a black one out of Congo. That said, I concur that the title of his book (“Black Athena”) is misleading. Bernal’s work, albeit its flaws (many of which he rectified and supported with evidence), has a lot of merit and invite the academic to investigate further.

    The development of the Western world (Ancient Greece and later Rome) was indeed not indigenous but came to out from the influence of the Near East through the Egyptians and the Canaanites (Phoenicians) – neither of which were black for the record. This was known and acknowledged by both the ancient Greeks and historians up until the 19th century. The Anglo-Saxon-British ruling class could not bare such reality. And thus, they rewrote history: the Eastern migration was replaced with an invented one from the North and the people of the Near Eastern were erased from history to solely make room to the Greeks and Romans (whom the Anglo-Saxon elite believed to be German). They essentially Aryanized history.

    ____

    * Real semitic (Canaanite, Phoenician, Ugaritic, Akkadian, etc) and not the “Jewish” related fallacy.

    • Agree: Seraphim
    • Replies: @Alden
  268. Alden says:
    @the shadow

    FB is a very ignorant person. I doubt he could give approximate dates of the civil war, WWs 1&2 and Vietnam. I doubt he knows how many states are in America. He never refutes a comment with facts just jumps in and says the commenter is stupid. He doesn’t even google and cite Wikipedia in his attempts to argue. Just attacks other commenters as stupid. He seems to be anti White and anti White European civilization. But can’t even express his anti White ideas coherently

    • Replies: @the shadow
  269. Virgil S says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Balkan Romance — especially including Romanian — developed from Latin during the seven centuries when Latin was the official language of the Balkans (as well as most the Roman Empire).

    Romanian developed on both sides of the Danube, in old Dacia as well as in the Dacia Aureliana created following Roman withdrawal to the Danube. From the third to the sixth century AD there was a Dacia south of the Danube that included modern Serbia, Western Bulgaria, Kosovo and Montenegro. There was extensive Roman colonization in the Balkans and population movements back and forth across the Danube. Several Roman emperors, including Constantine and Justinian, were born in the Balkans and spoke a form of Latin as their native tongue.

    Romanian vocabulary does have a lot more than 10% Slavic and prior to the fairly recent re-Latinization it had perhaps 30% Slavic. However the origin of Slavic itself is open to debate: it may be partly evolved from Thracian.

    As to the use of the term Romania for the country, it was indeed adopted only in the 19th century. But the ethnonym Român goes back to the original Roman Empire. It’s a matter of endonym versus exonym: internal versus external name, like Magyar versus Hungarian or Deutsche versus German. While Romanians were known for centuries to the world as Vlachs, as far as we can tell, all along their internal name for themselves was Români.

  270. Seraphim says:
    @Gleimhart Mantooso

    It reveals the real intent of the whole ‘polylogia’. Expect more non-sense.

  271. @Nick Kollerstrom

    Many pionneers in chronology revisionism argued on the basis of astronomy, precisely. Isaac Newton was one of them.

  272. @V. K. Ovelund

    when a history of very long ago has been pieced together from fragmentary sources of various, heterogeneous kinds, one wants some skeptics. The author would fill that rôle.

    Exactly. We’re doing two things (we because I am only synthetizing research by many others) : we’re raising legitimate questions, and we’re proposing tentative hypotheses requiring further research. Most important are the questions.

  273. @jujubean

    Revisionism of Scaligerian chronology is where I’m heading.
    I’ll mention Fomenko at length in my third article, as well as Gunnar Heinsohn, whose hard evidence I find more convincing. If you don’t know his work, check his video on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c876lPZ-UZU and his articles on http://www.q-mag.org/gunnar-heinsohns-latest.html

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  274. 22pp22 says:
    @Weston Waroda

    bătrân – old man – derived from Latin veteranus.

    I know its only one world but I think it sheds light on the origins of the Romanian language.

  275. GMC says:
    @runeulv

    My other thought was – how many old documents did the old Russian Orthodox church, have in it’s possession before the Zionist took over after 1918, and how many are still around. I figure the Greeks lost many of documents , to the world – looters. Erasing the past seems to be an old enterprise, that is still going on.

  276. @Alden

    You’re venting your spleen on exotic objects that nobody in their right minds takes seriously, Black Athena, that’s like an inside joke. Shooting at fireflies when there’s a dragon in the room, the dragon which made these fireflies possible.

    The Dragon in the room is the utter and total annihilation of your traditional historical narrative which I’m sure must have been taught till the 1950’s the heroic conquest of the west by hard and industrious men the transformation of a continent sized wilderness into the most advanced industrial civilization on the planet – that history is a smoking ruin now – in 5 or 6 decades Jewish subversives along with their liberal accomplices have overturned it completely. The desecration and vandalism of the statues is just your victorious enemies marching through the city to state the obvious that they won and you lost badly. The historical analogy to this is the monuments to Communist heroes being torn down in Eastern Europe after the collapse of communism, the same thing has happened to you and the chances of a Robert Lee statue again going up in Richmond are the same as the chances of a Stalin statue going up in Warsaw – which is never.

    Your congress bending the knee is the same as Lee surrendering to Grant in Appomattox this time the surrender of your traditional Historical narrative. Worse you are suffering a demographic collapse, the average age of a white person is 43, the median age is 58! No revolution from such demographics. You could try to take over the Republican party and try to broaden its appeal with the biggest minority the Hispanics as Ron and Fred suggest but you guys are too racist for that. So that’s where you stand a grim and forbidding situation without any succor in sight.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/30/most-common-age-among-us-racial-ethnic-groups/

    You will go gentle into that good night there won’t be any raging against the dying of the light.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Alden
  277. Alden says:
    @FB

    If you want to know more about dating methods why not type it into any search engine? That’s what the internet’s for, research.

    Papyrus and parchment are made from plants and animal skins so they’re easy to date. Did the Romans use parchment? I don’t know. The Shroud of Turin’s been carbon 14 dated at about 12-1300 AD. Some museum textile expert figures the linen is a medieval French weave and was an expensive high end fabric. Carbon 14 dating is widely accepted.

    The Vatican dug up the alleged grave of St Peter. Bones of a man in his 60s carbon 14 dated to first century AD were found. If it wasn’t St Peter it was a man of the right age and right century. Supposedly they were reburied. I doubt it. They’re probably in some filtered air humidity and light controlled laboratory type box ✝️ ✝️

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Kapyong
  278. @atzavar4

    Anyone who is prepared to entertain the idea that the works of Tacitus are “really” forgeries produced in the 15th century demonstrates his or her utter incompetence to consider the question. Anyone able to seriously engage Tacitus’s works in the original Latin knows that he is one of the master prose stylists of late classical Rome and one of the greatest historiographers of western literature.

    This anonymous essay is silly nonsense and the lengthy “discussion” makes utter fools of its participants and mocks their pretentious ignorance with every phrase. It also reflects very poorly on the Unz Review readership at large. It is to giggle.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @22pp22
    , @V. K. Ovelund
    , @FB
  279. @Craigmaddie

    I have heard of Kammeier but most unfortunately do not read German. If only I could get my hand on an English or French translation.

  280. R2b says:
    @syonredux

    One can enjoy this redaction ” First Millennium Revisionist”, as a summer feuilleton, stimulating answers that educate properly.

  281. tiami says:

    FMR
    To answer your question about Latin origin and Dacian connection, yes. It also spoils otherwise very good article a little. Looking forward to next writings.

  282. @22pp22

    >>Latin has an odd way of reporting speech. It is called the accusative and infinitive. You don’t say, “I said that I was true.” You say, “I said it to be true.” “He thought himself to be very unhappy.”

    The use of ‘that’ (quod) appears fairly early and displaces the accusative and infinitive.<<

    Actually you don't say "I said it to be true" but "I said: "It's true!"

    The Latin use of 'that' (quod) has become a kind of Western aesthetic standard in Bible translation. For example 'that' is forcefully being inserted where Hebrew has the exclamation word 'Kie' (Yes!) So when Hebrew has literally "And God saw: Yes! Good!" most of the translations follow the Latin quod – model, probably because too many exclamations in a sentence are aesthetically deemed to be ugly. Thus the Hebrew is being latinized and aesthetically 'bettered' into "And God saw that it was good". The idea that God in Hebrew would speak vulgarly in live speech exclamations is being dismissed beforehand because of Latin being the ideal.

    The article knocks down the Latin language ideal from its pedestal, which is instructive.

  283. tiami says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    There was no Dalmatian Romance language other than Latin. Even Venetians used Latin.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  284. Robjil says:

    Representational art is the key. I noticed that when going museums of different world cultures. Cultures that allowed representational art are more interesting to view in these museums.

    https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-representational-art.htm

    Art with recognizable subject matter has always been the favored form, beginning with cave paintings and small figurines created by prehistoric humans. Representational art was produced in Egypt,and it hit a peak in ancient Greece,when sculptures of the human figure were prized for their great realism. The Romans continued the Greek tradition of realistic art.

    Pompei has lots of representational art painting and artwork that shows all aspects of ancient Roman culture.

    Here is a short history of the development of Roman painting.
    https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/ropt/hd_ropt.htm

    Art historians and archaeologists describe the development of Roman painting in four styles. The First Style (ca. 200–60 B.C.) was largely an exploration of simulating marble of various colors and types on painted plaster. Artists of the late Republican period (second to first century B.C.) drew upon examples of early Hellenistic (late fourth to third century B.C.) painting and architecture in order to simulate masonry. Typically, the wall was divided into three horizontal, painted zones crowned with a stucco cornice of dentils based upon the Doric architectural order
    . The decline of the First Style coincided with the Roman colonization of Pompeii in 80 B.C., which transformed what had essentially been an Italic town with Greek influences into a Roman city. Going beyond the simple representation of costlier building materials, artists began to borrow from the figural repertoire of Hellenistic wall painting, depicting gods, mortals, and heroes in various contexts.

  285. @FB

    Wikipedia has a pretty solid outline of the “immigrationist” theory. Makes a lot more sense than assuming Dacians somehow were the ancestors of ancient Romans.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Romanians#Immigrationist_theory

  286. R2b says:
    @syonredux

    One can enjoy this redaction ” First Millennium Revisionist”, (FMR), as a summer feuilleton, stimulating answers that educate properly.

  287. @Kent Nationalist

    That is a legitimate objections. It will be answered in the third part. I have made here a working hypothesis which I will correct later, by shifting to another, actually more radical hypothesis (a shortening of chronology, based on Gunnar Heinsohn’s work). But at this stage, one answer is : those who forged Tacitus didn’t invent the name Tacitus, they knew very well what Tacitus was supposed to have written. The same goes with the others.

  288. @Hans Vogel

    I thought better to build up the case for a revision of chronology in two stages, before introducing the global hypothesis which I find so far the most convincing. But at this stage, and since you mention Illig, it is perhaps better that I indicate that I believe Gunnar Heinsohn’s work provides the best solution. What he says about Charlemagne is not incompatible with your suggestion. There are several ways to look at it. But basically, he claims that there has always been only one Roman Empire, and that the Germanic Roman Empire was part of it. My own contribution will be to stress that the heart of the Roman Empire was Constantinople from the start, and that only around the 9th century did Italy and Germany struggled to shift the center of the Empire to themselves (by inventing a precedent in the case of Rome, a matter of “stealing the birthright”). Thanks for the source. I’ll certainly read Giovanni Carnevale’s book before posting my next article.

  289. @Alden

    No explanation of what happened in Europe between 400 and 1,000 AD is worth while without discussing the extreme depopulation of the Justinian Plague.

    I agree, this is a key. From that traumatic point, history started to be confused, and then, as civilization was rebuilt, history was also reinvented, with bits and pieces, to suit different political agendas. But only much later chronology was standardized, on a wrong basis.

  290. R2b says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Good point! Pilate didn’t want Jesus condemned, so why dominante the process. As it went, it was after the jews bidding. The twisting of FMR is tendetious speculation, without any base.

  291. R2b says:
    @Norbertus

    Sacred Scripture does not mention S:t Peter going to Rome. The Church was built on his confession of faith. That is the rock, not an alleged apostolic succession, for the moment crowned with the current shepherd.

    • Replies: @Norbertus
  292. R2b says:
    @Nick Kollerstrom

    How do you tie these antiquity astrology charts, to the, in my wiew, preposterous claims made here. Am I missing something obvious?

  293. @Gleimhart Mantooso

    Yes, “almost by definition” because history as seen from religious writers is driven by some celestial engineer, using miracles, revelations, visions (e.g. Constantine’s), superhuman saints, and such.

  294. Franz says:
    @Lurker

    Maybe the wall was a base of operations – they spent their time patrolling, raiding north of the wall?

    They could use the mile forts cleverly, for sure, and at least a few Scottish scholars have noted that the Sarmations who first got there had more in common with the Picts north of the wall than the Romanized Britons they were defending. It might have been real interesting for awhile.

    What bugs me is no major Brit filmmaker ever tried to make a picture about Roman Britain entirely from the Pictish point of view. I’d go see it for sure. At least Americans have attempted to make movies about Crazy Horse and Tecumseh from their point of view, so it’s not asking much.

  295. @Old Palo Altan

    Lynn Catterson is not a “lone summer lecturer”, she is a professor at Columbia University and the author of, Finding, Fixing, Faking, Making: Supplying Sculpture in ‘400 Florence, Ediart, 2014

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  296. songbird says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Spengler said that the names of the Roman kings came from the names of the Gens and not the reverse. To me, this seems like a really odd notion – that’s not really a massive time interval, as far as pedigrees go. But maybe, it is a widely-accepted idea? They are usually called “legendary”, and I know the Gauls sacked Rome, destroying their early archive, if they had one.

    I believe he also said that they made up their earlier history in a continuing process, that went on into at least the first century.

    I think this notion of lack of true early history is kind of implicit, among the Greeks, when Thucydides writes that nothing important happened before the Persians fought the Greeks – an idea that Spengler, of course, dismisses.

  297. 22pp22 says:
    @J. Alfred Powell

    Then why are you here? Surely you have better things to do, like winning a Nobel prize in physics or running a Fortune 500 Company. It is to giggle. And is your Latin really good enough to judge anything? You sweep in with a condescending smirk having demonstrated precisely no knowledge of anything.

    Anf for what it’s worth, I think the article is garbage, too.

    • Replies: @J. Alfred Powell
  298. 22pp22 says:
    @Ron Unz

    Why did you publish this article?

    Why do you run the site?

    Surely, someone of your talents could find something better to do with there time than publishing articles the content of which they obviously despise.

    Your contempt for 99.99% of humanity is obvious.

    Surely, there must be something more rewarding you could do with your life than flaunting it, day in day out.

    I can read medieval Latin well, and I read the article because I respected you as a Classicist. I know very little about the ancient world, although have read Germania. I have an interest in Byzantium and the Middle Ages

    No that I know you were doing it to have a laugh at my expense, my estimation of you as a human being has collapsed.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    , @FB
  299. @brabantian

    “Most people don’t know that the most ancient ‘Bible texts’ are not in Hebrew but in Greek, the Septuagint of the 200s BCE, whose composition – fraudulent fabrication? – began to take place about 40-60 years after the death of Alexander the Great … allegedly a ‘translation of lost Hebrew’ … But no older Hebrew text has ever been found”

    I’m afraid this is incorrect, as is most of the rest of your post. The oldest existant manuscripts of Old Testament books were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, dated to the first century BC, and they are almost all in Hebrew.

    The oldest manuscript copies from the Septuagint we have date from the 300s AD.

  300. @RichardTaylor

    Remember something else: intellectuals told us Greek statues were white, without color, in order to appear austere. That turned out to be totally wrong. They were painted up. So, we’ve gotten a lot of things wrong.

    We are undoubtedly still getting a lot of things wrong. This is not substantial evidence that classical history were a farce.

    Historiographical errors are parsimoniously and presumably adequately explained by mere distance in time and the consequent gaps in the record. Go far enough back, and the record is more gaps than record, and then it takes substantial cleverness to piece the record together. That was, after, rather long ago. Did one not expect some mistakes?

    Did one not expect many mistakes?

    Whatever one thinks of professional historians, the good ones spend a lot of time comparing and contrasting original or oldest available documents in the documents’ original languages. One should be more prepared to listen to professional historians for this reason.

    When you note that Greek statues were “painted up,” how did you find this out? Was it not via the work of one of the very professionals in question?

    No, I think that the historical profession has earned respect for its findings.

    • Replies: @RichardTaylor
  301. @Wood Stove

    Nuclear weapons are a massive hoax.

    Ditto.

    See, for starters:

    “The Nuclear Hoax” (http://mileswmathis.com/trinity.pdf)
    and
    “The Bikini Atoll Nuclear Tests were Faked” (http://mileswmathis.com/bikini.pdf)
    and
    “The atomic bomb hoax 1945 – today” (http://heiwaco.tripod.com/bomb.htm#116)

    • Replies: @Wood Stove
    , @Ivan
  302. anon[238] • Disclaimer says: • Website
    @trelane

    Christian and other fanatics destroy books, monuments, libraries, then say there is no documentation.

    Amazing this is getting traction as the far-left tries to erase the history of last few centuries as well?

  303. ivan says:
    @trelane

    Oh boy , so you are going to truncate 500 to 1,000 years of first millenium history. Where is the time for all that action.

  304. antibeast says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    In the 19th century for instance, the (eugenic) Anglo-Saxon ruling class claimed the ancient Greeks and the Romans were Germans. The historical Eastern migration was replaced with an invented one from the North. The Near Eastern people (Canaanites (Phoenicians), Egyptians, et al.) who were instrumental in the development of the Western world were erased.

    That’s because the Anglo-Saxons are descendants of Germanic tribes from Northern Europe who settled in England after the Fall of Rome. But the Germanic tribes never became part of Greco-Roman Civilization, and were never Romanized by the Romans nor Hellenized by the Greeks. Tacitus wrote about them in his book Germania, calling them a primitive people with a warrior lifestyle.

    Bottom line: Ruling classes write History. The rest is history.

    Without a history of their own, the Anglo-Saxons had to invent their “fake history” of Western Civilization as exemplified by Nordicist theories expounded by Madison Grant in his book “Passing of the Great Race”. Here’s a quote:

    This is the race that gave the world the great civilizations of Egypt, of Crete, of Phoenicia including Carthage, of Etruria and of Mycenean Greece. It gave us, when mixed and invigorated with Nordic elements, the most splendid of all civilizations, that of ancient Hellas, and the most enduring of political organizations, the Roman State. To what extent the Mediterranean race entered into the blood and civilization of Rome, it is now difficult to say, but the traditions of the Eternal City, its love of organization, of law and military efficiency, as well as the Roman ideals of family life, loyalty, and truth, point clearly to a Nordic rather than to a Mediterranean origin.

    In other words, Nordicists claim that all the great civilizations of the Mediterranean World — Egypt, Phoenicia, Greece, Rome — came from the Nordic “race” who settled the Mediterranean and interbred with the Egyptians, Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans without which they would have remained as primitive as the Germanic tribes living in Northern Europe.

    Bottom line: Germanic barbarians without their own history write “Fake History”. The rest is history.

    • Agree: Hiram of Tyre, Seraphim
    • Thanks: FB
  305. @eD

    The revisionist argument I take it is that the empire was always based in the Balkans, and that all accounts of the Republic, as well as most accounts of the early empire, both of which were obviously based in Italy, are Italian Renaissance fabrications.

    Something along this line. But at this stage, I am mostly pointing out inconsistencies. The global hypothesis I will propose later is based on a revision of chronology on the basis of Gunnar Heinsohn’s stratigraphic observations, which, paradoxically, solves the problem pointed out by Hochart and yourself (the survival of ancient literature in monasteries).

    the Senate remained in Rome,

    Are you sure? Rome had ceased to be the imperial capital in 286. What were the senators doing there?

  306. Mike P says:
    @Alden

    The MWP was all over Earth, as were all other major cold and warm periods. The “European MWP” canard was invented by the Global Warming hoaxers, who wanted to get rid of natural variation so that the modern warm period, which fits the 1000 year period of natural variation so well, would seem less natural.

  307. @First Millennium Revisionist

    The article never explains why the graffiti would be in Latin.

    Or the inscriptions which refer to names which are clearly not those of 17th century Italians

    Or how people would have completely forgotten and have mistaken it for an ancient city less than a hundred years later.

  308. ivan says:
    @utu

    Astounding. I did not realise that Fomenko was a state lackey for all his mathematical achievements.

  309. @V. K. Ovelund

    No, I think that the historical profession has earned respect for its findings.

    That may be a fair point. It may not be historians as much as intellectuals who create a false impression of the past. We were told a lot of fairy tales about the Middle Ages and my understanding is that many historians knew better.

    When you note that Greek statues were “painted up,” how did you find this out? Was it not via the work of one of the very professionals in question?

    Not sure about that. Some very influential art historians ignored evidence that the statues had color. I understand it was an archeologist named Brinkmann who finally settled the issue using UV light.

    And, if you want to get a book published about the “history” of, say, America in the 1800s, you better include plenty of Current Year thinking.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Alden
  310. @Robjil

    Cultures that allowed representational art are more interesting to view in these museums.

    Even that the holiest of holies in a secular culture the Museums are under attack in the US check out the inflammatory headlines and the article, the Chandala rage of people who could never ever produce anything like it.

    People are calling for museums to be abolished. Can whitewashed American history be rewritten?

    Who are these ‘people’ calling for museums to be abolished certainly not blacks who don’t give a shit about them and wouldn’t even probably loot them.

    https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/natural-history-museum-whitewashing-monuments-statues-trnd/index.html

    US museums, dependent as they are on the largesse of wealthy individuals and families, are far from a future in which controversial donors, who, for instance, hold views that run counter to science, nonetheless have galleries or other features named for them. The AMNH itself was under scrutiny for taking money from Rebekah Mercer, a major donor to the Republican party, whose leader Donald Trump has repeatedly denied the existence of climate change during his time in office. Mercer left the board when her term ended in 2019. Meanwhile in 2014, the Metropolitan Museum of Art named the revamped plaza on Fifth Avenue for donor David H. Koch, likewise a Republican donor, who is notable for funding efforts to undercut climate change science.

    Wealthy Republicans aren’t allowed to sponsor art. Cancelled. It gets better than that

    This is an historic moment — a pause and reflect moment for individuals and institutions,” said Makeba Clay, the chief diversity officer at the Phillips Collection in Washington, DC, over email. “The systemic and unrelenting injustices against members of the Black community have existed for hundreds of years and continue to exist all around us, including in our museums. We know we have work to do and that means being actively anti-racist — not passively non-racist.”
    Artist whose exhibition on police brutality was abruptly canceled in February says institutions must do better
    Clay was the inaugural appointee to her role, which she took on in 2018 and her message is that it’s not enough to “amplify” voices and messages, art institutions must take action. ”

    We are looking at our staff and board, both overwhelmingly white, and actively examining our hiring and recruitment processes to promote greater diversity

    ,” she said. “We recently held a town hall, which uncovered stark differences between staff of color and white staff.”
    Clay also said that art does not exist outside struggle. That while it can be used for “constructive discourse, building empathy and creating community,” art also “can confront current issues and topics that aren’t neutral.”
    Adding: “What appears like radical action is exactly what museums need to pursue to prove that they have a valuable role to play in this national discourse.

    Did you notice that she was just threatening the museum like an uncouth ANC thug, no thanks, no expression of joy and reverence at being allowed into such hallowed grounds, not a shout out at the masters whose works are exhibited there just rage and narcissism she will be firing these ‘overwhelmingly white’ people who hired her and she’s a professional shakedown artist to boot.

    Among the artists featured in the Phillips collection are

    Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Gustave Courbet, El Greco, Vincent van Gogh, Henri Matisse, Claude Monet, Pablo Picasso, Georges Braque, Pierre Bonnard, Paul Klee, Arthur Dove, Winslow Homer, James McNeill Whistler, Jacob Lawrence, Augustus Vincent Tack, Georgia O’Keeffe, Karel Appel, Joan Miro, Mark Rothko and Berenice Abbott.

    What does Makebe Clay have to do with these masters, why does the museum require her ‘services’ no doubt highly paid, she has absolutely nothing to do with art, why don’t the likes of her approach rich Blacks and open their own museums? What’s stopping them? They have Zero interest in these masters so why this hostility to museums.

  311. ivan says:
    @jujubean

    Have you considered that he his pushing stellar knowledge, celestial movements etc, in the face of the general ignorance of his readers. How many of readers have the knowledge to cross-check such things? The man may be a mathematician, but that doesn’t mean his assertion of knowledge of anything else matters when no other specialist in that field bothers to cross-check him.

  312. @utu

    A concerted attack on Western Civilization and its foundations like Ancient Rome …

    We were taught Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were the foundations of the West. But there is another view that this isn’t quite accurate. That they were puffed by intellectuals for a variety of reasons.

    Remember Carl Sagan saying we’d be living in the stars today if only Rome hadn’t fallen! False.

    As someone said, you’d have a heck of a time getting to the moon using Roman numerals. A lot of Greek “science” was silly and mixed with magical thinking.

    Is there a reason that craftsmen and proto-scientists working in Western Europe in the 1200s needed anything the Greeks or Romans provided?

  313. ariadna says:
    @Emslander

    “When you look at his arguments on history, the purpose of this science fiction account is clear. He hates Christianity and dismisses all of the excellent and objective scholarship done by monks and saints between AD 300 and AD 1500.”

    You underappreciate the scope of the author’s ambition. It was not only Christianity but white European history and culture as well that is the object of his animus.

  314. @tiami

    I am not claiming a Dalmatian Romance language existed alongside classical Latin. We are talking about 800-1000 AD, by which point vulgar Latin had split into mutually unintelligible dialects. By that point the former Latin speakers in the Balkans had already moved towards a language that is closer to modern Romanian than Ciceronian Latin. Even into the last century there were speakers of “Aromanian” in Dalmatia, Albania, Serbia and Greece. More evidence that modern Romanian probably came from ancestors of Aromanian speakers who moved (or were driven) north across the Danube, not some vestigial colony of lost Romans, and certainly not some ancient Dacian language.

    • Replies: @tiami
  315. @Alden

    I was engaging in a bit of hyperbole regarding The Medieval Warm Period, it wasn’t “confined” to West Europe, the warm effects were most pronounced in the North Atlantic region, including Northeastern North America and Greenland. It was really a paradise time for Europe, particularly in contrast to the Dark Ages Cold Period. Evidence of warming effects in East Asia is much thinner, and the Tropical Pacific was definately cooler than normal. We know the Medieval Warm Period was NOT global, but why it happened is unclear, but its signal is clear between 900AD-1300AD. The Dark Ages Cold Period appears to be a synergy between natural variability and three massive volcanic eruptions in 536AD, 540AD, and 547AD that effected the Northern Hemisphere only, with a period of 600AD-800AD. I can’t find much as to its global extent, but the negative effects were very pronounced in Europe. In contrast, Saudi Arabia benefited by much increased rain, and these positive conditions caused the rise in power of the disgusting satanic muzzie cult. The important point is these past natural varibilities were bad for some areas, good for others. In contrast the present, extreme, human caused global warming has produced bad effects everywhere.

  316. I sympathize with many readers’ frustration for not knowing my name. Here is my justification. I have written, under my real name, on subjects regarding recent history which I consider much more important today. Fully aware that this “first millennium revisionism” is highly controversial and of little urgency, I do not wish to provide an easy argument to the opponents of my other research. Yet I find this field of research interesting, and wished to introduce it to unz.com readers. I am not disappointed, and very grateful to all the commenters who contributed to this debate. I have learned a lot. For example: At some point (my comment n°54), I thought that I would have to abandon my point about Latin and Dacian, which received the most criticism. Then came Weston Waroda and a few others (n°226, 249), who informed us that the thesis of the Dacian origin or Latin is being engaged in Romanian academia (I was vaguely aware of it, but hadn’t been able to find a source). Now, I wonder if this is not one of the strongest arguments for considering that there is something very fundamentally wrong with our picture of the Roman Empire.
    A secondary justification for not signing this article is that it is truly the result of a collective research with acquaintances who also wish to remain anonymous. I didn’t wish to claim the whole credit for myself.
    For what it is worth, I have in Ph.D. in Medieval studies, specializing in what can be called “cultural anthropology”. It is during my Ph.D. research that I first became aware of problems of cultural continuity between Antiquity and the Middle Ages.

    • Replies: @tiami
    , @vot tak
    , @Nicucino
  317. @J. Alfred Powell

    Anyone who is prepared to entertain the idea that the works of Tacitus are “really” forgeries produced in the 15th century demonstrates his or her utter incompetence to consider the question. Anyone able to seriously engage Tacitus’s works in the original Latin knows that he is one of the master prose stylists of late classical Rome and one of the greatest historiographers of western literature.

    Go easy, sir. You are probably not wrong, but the bigger story here is the general cratering of trust in authority.

    Most of us will never read much Latin. We need to be able to trust those that do. Unfortunately, professors of the humanities in the United States have, as a class, been so dishonest for so long that no one—almost literally no one—believes them any more.

    This anonymous essay is silly nonsense and the lengthy “discussion” makes utter fools of its participants and mocks their pretentious ignorance with every phrase. It also reflects very poorly on the Unz Review readership at large. It is to giggle.

    So, after giggling, what would you have The Unz Review’s readership at large do? Would you have them just start believing the very persons that have been lying to them?

    I think that you are blaming the wrong people.

    • Replies: @J. Alfred Powell
  318. @Kent Nationalist

    Many monuments and statues erected in the 18th and even 19th century have Latin inscriptions all over Europe.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  319. Pompeii is a case in point and would require a whole article by itself. I have pointed to one in French (my comment 301).
    In English, a quick search leads to:
    https://www.stolenhistory.org/threads/79-a-d-no-more-pompeii-got-buried-in-1631.121/

    and a video on Fomenko (Pompeii addressed from 43 minutes): https://www.bitchute.com/video/9tuomx8VJBZW/

  320. @22pp22

    Why did you publish this article?

    Why do you run the site?

    I do not presume to answer for @Ron Unz, who can answer for himself. However, it would appear that he publishes articles that are (a) written in competent English and (b) based on research.

    Like you, I would prefer in theory to read a journal curated by a sober editor with good judgment. Unfortunately, most such journals have systematically purged dissidence, especially right-wing dissidence. Meanwhile, most such journals—indeed, practically all of them—have imposed a drearily conventional, politically correct, hysterical phanstasm in place of obvious reality. The result is that no one trusts sober editors with good judgment any more. The collateral damage is that, if Ron Unz, who belongs to the ethnic group most disproportionately responsible for the aforementioned phantasm, tried to be a sober editor with good judgment, few would trust him, either. Unfair, but that is how it is.

    It is a sad state of affairs, but I think that one needs something like The Unz Review in times like these. Yet if Mr. Unz will publish such a journal then he must just do it, and that means publishing articles like this.

    • Agree: Weston Waroda
  321. FB says: • Website
    @22pp22

    Wow…one of the best online meltdowns I’ve yet seen…😂 😂 😂

  322. FB says: • Website
    @J. Alfred Powell

    So you enjoyed reading Tacitus…and that’s supposed to prove it could not have been written by a renaissance guy out to make a buck [in fact more like a fortune, it seems the Catholic popes were paying…an entire villa for one manuscript…?]

    What’s that supposed to prove to me…some internet fool’s opinion about being a ‘master stylist’…?

    Get real…a lot of our so-called history is completely fake as archeology and genetics are proving…

  323. @First Millennium Revisionist

    No monuments and statues from the 18th century have Roman names, which are completely different from those of modern Italians
    Why are the thousands of pieces of graffiti about trivial matters entirely written in Latin if this is a synthetic language?
    Why did people forget about the existence of this city when they excavated it a century later?

    Why do other monuments have inscriptions referring to dates in the Roman calendar and referring to/depicting people and events from ancient history?

    Titus and Vespasian

    Arch of the supposedly fictional Constantine

    To the Emperor Caesar Flavius Constantinus, the greatest, pious, and blessed Augustus: because he, inspired by the divine, and by the greatness of his mind, has delivered the state from the tyrant and all of his followers at the same time, with his army and just force of arms, the Senate and People of Rome have dedicated this arch, decorated with triumphs

  324. @FB

    Another hasbarah goon exposed spouting his Zionist bilge water.

    You have nothing to say, you say nothing.

    Go crawl back into the slime pit you inhabit,

  325. FB says: • Website
    @Alden

    That’s what the internet’s for, research.

    Thanks, Captain Obvious…

    Unlike you, I already know the ‘internet research’ level of knowledge…what I’m interested in is hearing from EXPERTS…

    Btw science is not a static thing, something that was accepted yesterday may be discarded as crap tomorrow…

    Radiocarbon dating is certainly not some kind of slam dunk…it is a quite intricate science that must be handled by people with a high level of expertise…even then, it may not be very reliable or even accurate…there are many known flaws in the method and some of these have caused quite a stir in the scientific community…

    So yes, a thorough discussion seems in order…

    Here are the basics…the results are generally given with one so-called standard deviation, which is about a range of 160 years…but that result represents only a 68 percent confidence level…

    That’s not very high and it could be a whole lot less in fact…

    Experiments have shown that retesting the same sample often yields very different results…one done at the British Museum in the ’70s showed wild swings of up to 400 years…

    The radiocarbon method can be used to date parchment and paper since they are both organic materials…but it cannot date the ink…

    Besides, it seems like those fakes mentioned in this article and still residing in museums have not been tested anyway…

    There are other dating methods also…each one involves a knowledge of a particular scientific discipline…bottom line is you can’t just take these results with complete confidence…

  326. Yevardian says:

    This sounds like Fomenko’s ‘New Chronology’ or some such nonsense.

  327. tiami says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    But why do we need to find origins all the time? Claiming Latin came from Dacian is close to saying English came from Aborigins. Latin might well be artificial lingua franca of western empire just like greek was in the east. So called Dacian/Thracian/Illyrian languages were most probably Slavic, especially if we are talking about shortened chronology – if you know what I meen.

  328. @Alden

    Boy did you measure him up correctly.

  329. Robjil says:

    Roman mosaics are found all over the ex-Roman empire, which is the entire Mediterranean sea region, France and up to England.
    It would be difficult to twist this as not real. It is such a large area.

    https://www.invaluable.com/blog/roman-mosaics/

    Roman mosaics are comprised of geometric and figural images created by arrangements of tiny pieces of stone and glass. The earliest forms of Greco-Roman mosaics were conceived in Greece in the late 5th century B.C. Though the Greeks refined the art of figural mosaics by embedding pebbles in mortar, the Romans expanded on this established technique, using tesserae—cubes of stone, ceramic, or glass—to form intricate, colorful designs.

    Today, these works offer a vivid picture of ancient Roman life; a glimpse into the everyday activities of an ancient civilization which included gladiator contests, sports, and agriculture, while also serving as documentation of everyday items such as food, clothes, tools, and weapons. These works of art adorned the walls of private homes and public buildings, spreading to new geographic locations as the Roman Empire expanded. Mosaics have been uncovered by archaeologists in a range of modern-day locales—including France and Tunisia—and reveal a combination of local traditions and Roman influence.

  330. J says:
    @22pp22

    Yes, the article is garbage. It suggests that Julius Caesar was a made up personage on the basis of David Henige criticism of Caesar’s report to the Senate about his doings in Gallia. But Henige only criticizes Caesar’s numbers, why the number of enemies killed are always round numbers, say 300,000 Helvetii killed, how did he count them? And how is possible that his troops killed say 100,000 without suffering losses? Of Henige’s comments are from ignorance of warfare, Caesar may be spinning his deeds, but not much. He was a politician. Regarding his massacres, it is well known that in the antiquity battles were like that, there was a point when one side lost its nerve and tried to run away, and from that point it was pure massacre, people died in mounds and were suffocated, trampled, etc. Caesar is very precise and his contemporaries never disputed his accounts. To doubt his very existence is foolish or worse.

  331. FB says: • Website
    @Peter Akuleyev

    The obvious answer is that Romanian speakers showed up in Dacia from the south many centuries after Romans had ceded the territory to the Huns and Slavs, and are basically the descendants of Italian shepherds looking for better pasture and safety.

    That’s just nonsense that makes no sense whatsoever…

    Anyway…like I said, archeology and genetics are moving forward…most of the bullshit known as ‘history’ has already been proved wrong…it’s just that the archeological and anthropological professions aren’t interested in getting into a debate with silly culture warriors…

    The revolution is already over my friend…and there’s no going back now…

  332. @V. K. Ovelund

    Hi V K Ovelund, try this experiment. Pull out your job profile, resume or CV and have a go at re-writing it again. This time do it only for yourself. See the difference?
    Islamic religion has something relevent to this known as the ‘Hadihts’.
    They pertain to the acts and sayings of Muhammed and were vouchsafed by folks who were present and witnessed these events.
    These Hadiths were faithfully recorded and preserved. They eventually grew to some 400,000 and made Islamic jurisprudence a mess as Islamic law depended upon the Koran and Hadiths.
    The reason was state patronage and money and luxury provided by the Muslim nobility.
    The very same reasons existed for the forgers that provided part of European history and even today its happening.
    Digging for truth is a pleasurable occupation and has its own rewards. Life is fun.

  333. @Kent Nationalist

    Why do other monuments have inscriptions referring to dates in the Roman calendar and referring to/depicting people and events from ancient history?

    I promise I’ll answer you in my third article. (But I don’t promise my answer will satisfy you.)

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  334. @niteranger

    Another poster pointed out a link to a story on the decline of the horse where it evolved, North America. Apparently there are flint knives with horse DNA on them from as recently as 7000 years ago. The article is kinder to the Indians than the megafauna dieoff, claiming that horses were probably on the way out.

    The fact that stone tools with horse DNA were found indicates that the Indians butchered them. That lends credence to the idea of oral history containing some memory of horses.

    That it would be passed down for 7-9000 years is unlikely, but not impossible.

    I’d suggest you read the article:
    https://www.horsetalk.co.nz/2012/11/29/why-did-horses-die-out-in-north-america/

    • Thanks: FB
  335. @First Millennium Revisionist

    I am genuinely looking forward to reading your future articles

  336. FB says: • Website
    @niteranger

    Hey, when you take a break from blowarding you may check out some facts about horses dying out in North America, which was about 7,000 years ago…

  337. @First Millennium Revisionist

    She was when she wrote that article, which was universally derided at the time.

    But I was indeed wrong to write that her career was not helped by her idiocy: after all, such idiocy is part and parcel of being a “respected’ academic these days.

    I would further remark however that her later work seems respectable, even interesting, so maybe she learned her lesson?

  338. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    White fertility craters.

    It’s not white fertility that is cratering. Fertility is cratering among all populations in all advanced capitalist nations. Fertility has collapsed even more completely among East Asian populations in East Asian countries than among whites.

    The collapse in fertility therefore has zero to do with race or with anti-white racism.

    The collapse in fertility in the West was a long slow process caused by urbanisation, mass education, mass media, capitalism, the decline of religion, the rise of feminism (and remember that feminism began in the 1790s), steady improvements in contraceptive technology, the availability of safe abortion, consumerism. That fertility collapse began in the West in the late 19th century.

    All of the factors that caused fertility collapse in the West were imposed on other cultures, such as East Asian cultures, but in an accelerated manner over a shorter time period. The results have been the same.

    Fertility collapsed is an inevitable consequence of modernity. It has nothing whatever to do with race.

    But right-wingers come up with conspiracy theories to explain it, even though the actual explanation (which requires no conspiracy theories) is blindingly obvious. This is why I distrust conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories are for people who either do not understand how things actually work, or do not want to accept the real explanations for things.

    • Agree: ivan
    • Disagree: GazaPlanet
  339. Denis says:
    @Anon

    When reading it I was flabbergasted at all of the falsehood. One would not need to examine architecture in order to punch holes in pretty much every paragraph. I strongly suspect that this article is some kind of joke.

  340. FB & First Millenium Revisionists,

    Here are the basics…the results are generally given with one so-called standard deviation, which is about a range of 160 years…but that result represents only a 68 percent confidence level…

    Very interesting thanks, this antiques business is rife with forgery the biggest one possibly being the Shroud of Turin. Regarding Tacitus if the annals were forged my first instinct was that Poggio would have at least put some decent words in Tacitus’ mouth regarding the Christians considering who the buyer was and more this man was a true Renaissance man serving 7 popes as secretaries because of his consummate command over Latin and his beautiful handwriting. I could be countered by saying that he did it for authenticity’s sake, so I had to do standard internet research.

    Poggio was a towering figure during his time and amongst the numerous enemies he made was one of the foremost scholars of latin during his time Lorenzo Valla, a ferocious pit bull, the man who proved that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery. Poggio a formidable polemicist got his butt handed over to him by Lorenzo over…

    Poggio started in February 1452 with a full-dress critique of the Elegantiae, Valla’s major work on Latin language and style, where he supported a critical use of Latin eruditio going beyond pure admiration and respectful imitatio of the classics.

    At stake was the new approach of the humanae litterae (profane classical Greek and Latin literature) in relation to the divinae litterae (biblical exegesis of the Judeo-Christian “sacred scriptures”). Valla argued that biblical texts could be subjected to the same philological criticism as the great classics of antiquity. Poggio held that humanism and theology were separate fields of inquiry, and labeled Valla’s mordacitas (radical criticism) as dementia.[7]

    The reason I bring Lorenzo Valla up is that there is no way Poggio would have dared to attempt serial forgery in his presence or in a climate where scholars viciously battled each other.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poggio_Bracciolini

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorenzo_Valla

    Poggio was a very busy man..

    Throughout his long office of 50 years, Poggio served a total of seven popes: Boniface IX (1389–1404), Innocent VII (1404–1406), Gregory XII (1406–1415), Antipope John XXIII (1410–1415), Martin V (1417–1431), Eugenius IV (1431–1447), and Nicholas V (1447−1455). While he held his office in the Curia through that momentous period, which saw the Councils of Constance (1414–1418), in the train of Pope John XXIII, and of Basel (1431–1449), and the final restoration of the papacy under Nicholas V (1447)

    And how many manuscripts he discovered do you think that he had the time to forge..

    His most celebrated finds are De rerum natura, the only surviving work by Lucretius, De architectura by Vitruvius, lost orations by Cicero such as Pro Sexto Roscio, Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria, Statius’ Silvae, and Silius Italicus’s Punica, as well as works by several minor authors such as Frontinus’ De aquaeductu, Ammianus Marcellinus, Nonius Marcellus, Probus, Flavius Caper, and Eutyches.

    Let’s take De Rerum Natura;

    Poggio’s most famous find was the discovery of the only surviving manuscript of Lucretius’s De rerum natura (“On the Nature of Things”) known at the time, in a German monastery (never named by Poggio, but probably Fulda), in January 1417. Poggio spotted the name, which he remembered as quoted by Cicero. This was a Latin poem of 7,400 lines, divided into six books, giving a full description of the world as viewed by the ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus (see Epicureanism). The manuscript found by Poggio is not extant, but fortunately, he sent the copy to his friend Niccolò de’ Niccoli, who made a transcription in his renowned book hand (as Niccoli was the creator of italic script), which became the model for the more than fifty other copies circulating at the time. Poggio would later complain that Niccoli had not returned his original copy for 14 years. Later, two 9th-century manuscripts were discovered, the O (the Codex Oblongus, copied c. 825) and Q (the Codex Quadratus), now kept at Leiden University.[11]

    The first emboldened part shows that was there was something shady about this but keep in mind that these were unscrupulous manuscript thieves and Niccoli probably wanted to sell this prize find or keep it for himself. The second italicized part shows the perils of forgery if the two later discoveries didn’t corroborate Poggio’s find he would have been exposed as a fraud and his entire reputation would have collapsed.

    That’s why I think that the Annals weren’t forged there’s no guarantee that another Poggio wouldn’t have discovered a copy in an obscure monastery thereby exposing the forgers, BTW Poggio’s theft of the Annals was bitterly resented by the German monastery who complained to the pope about it thereby showing that they knew about it, Niccolo Niccoli stole the rest of the histories and some parts of the Annals from Boccacio’s library…

    The manuscripts of Varro, Tacitus, and Apuleius probably left Monte Cassino at the same time. They were rescued, as the phrase goes, by some humanist, who was probably none other than Boccaccio. To Petrarch the works of Tacitus and Varro were only known in name. The first to use these authors was Boccaccio; and this good fortune was granted him towards the end of his life. There can be no doubt that he possessed the Beneventan manuscripts of Tacitus and Varro which are now in the Laurentian library. This may be seen, on the one hand, from the copies of these manuscripts which he left in the Convent of S. Spirito in Florence, which correspond perfectly with the original; and from the fact that Boccaccio’s citations from Varro and Tacitus, in his Geneologia deorum and De claris mulieribus, as Pierre de Nolhac has shown, are taken only from books preserved in the Beneventan manuscripts, and from no others.

    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
  341. Denis says:
    @Ron Unz

    Hi Mr. Unz,

    I agree completely that this article has a rather silly thesis. My guess is that it is some kind of joke. I speculated among others that it was perhaps an experiment by some particularly creative student of history, media, or perhaps the social sciences: What would happen if one wrote an article making a ridiculous and easily debunked argument, but cited sources in a professional fashion, and then published it on a website frequented by conspiracy theorists? Would they be credulous enough to believe it? What would the reaction be?

    With that in mind, this piece is interesting for what it says about how easy it is to fashion nonsense out of whole cloth. The commentariat here, being largely English speaking and presumably coming from Western, or at least European, backgrounds, is largely able to see through the ruse, given the importance of Roman history to the Western world. But what if the subject were a nation or society whose history was less familiar to the general population, or perhaps somewhat less well established among (Western) professionals?

    Perhaps a determined liar would be able to circulate a completely ridiculous narrative, utterly detached from reality, if it were targetted at the right crowd, so long as they gave the appearance of professionalism.

  342. @Grahamsno(G64)

    I got cut off I wanted to end my explanation with the observation that wouldn’t it be more parsimonious to assume that Renaissance Italy produced Europe’s first smart fraction, highly educated, cultured and ambitious men who were not of traditional clergy or nobility who realized that there was a huge market for ancient classics and these could be found in monasteries across the continent, no such market existed before because there were no educated and wealthy societies in Europe till then, there was just nobility and serfs elsewhere except in Renaissance Italy where a new society was being born, rather than assuming that these were serial forgers of genius who cooked up an entire fictitious history one which we moderns still believe in.

    I prefer to believe my lying eyes.

    • Agree: ivan
  343. @22pp22

    My 3/4 Maori relatives speak it. Two great uncles migrated to NZ in the 1920’s. One married into a wealthy landowning Maori family. They became large scale Kiwi fruit exporters. As “Brown Bourgeosie” they are not appreciated by many Maoris. I think that this is why they kept up speaking Welsh. They also sponsor Maori speaking nursery schools. About 20 years ago, they got Matakana Island back in a court case at the House of Lords. They lost at Gate Pa. The other brother, a musician returned to Wales. Lots of sheep farmers from Mid Wales (Welsh speaking) went to NZ. So, Rugby. Patagonia aside, it’s the former colony with the strongest living Welsh associations.

  344. ariadna says:
    @Iris

    “I was brought up by a mother who was fluent and used it daily for her work”
    Your mother was “fluent” in Latin and used it in her daily work???! What did your mother do?

    • Replies: @Not Raul
    , @Iris
  345. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    My view is that public discourse controlled, directed and edited by sober, conventional persons has failed. I do not know why it has failed. I wish that it hadn’t, but it has; so, now, something like The Unz Review has got to be tried.

    And if the price of trying it is that we get to listen to some colorful ideas from time to time, so be it.

    I don’t entirely disagree with you. And I certainly don’t disagree that both politicians and the media often lie to us.

    The problem is that the colourful ideas that UR propagates are often ludicrously wrong-headed and dangerous and too many people accept those lies just as readily as normies accept the lies of politicians and the media. So all that happens is that people stop believing one set of lies and start believing a whole new set of lies and distortions.

    It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that all those American wars really have been fought for freedom and democracy. It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that American politicians are anything other than corrupt whores. It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that scientists always tell the truth (nobody can be relied upon to tell the truth if it’s in their own financial or career interests to lie).

    It’s also foolish and dangerous to believe crazy conspiracy theories about Jewish plots or Bolshevik plots or that COVID-19 was a dastardly Chinese Communist plot or that Putin stole the election in 2016 or to believe nonsense like pizzagate or that Lyndon Jonson was responsible for JFK’s assassination or that the moon landing or the Holocaust were hoaxes.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz
    , @cassandra
  346. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    One problem with zealous “conspiracy theorists” is that they tend to accept or propose all sorts of wild “conspiracy theories,” even those for which the very scanty supporting evidence is vastly outweighed by the evidence on the other side.

    Once you accept one conspiracy theory you’re more likely to accept others. Once you go down the rabbit hole you’re in Lewis Carroll’s reality.

    “Alice laughed. ‘There’s no use trying,’ she said. ‘One can’t believe impossible things.’

    I daresay you haven’t had much practice,’ said the Queen. ‘When I was your age, I always did it for half-an-hour a day. Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.

    Modern conspiracy theorists spend considerably more than half an hour a day practising.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  347. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RichardTaylor

    We know the “ignorance” of the Middle Ages was exaggerated. There was more technology available in the year 1300 than in the year 300. And also, they bathed in Medieval times!

    Yes. The idea of the Middle Ages as backward and stupid is essentially propaganda. Technological progress was slow but steady and quite impressive.

    • Agree: RichardTaylor
  348. FB says: • Website
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    I appreciate your thoughts…

    The issue of renaissance forgeries is just one part of it…

    We have now a historical ‘narrative’ about this era of so-called ‘antiquity’ that has been put together in basically the last few centuries…most of Europe was without literacy until quite recently, in historical terms…much less a cohesive historical record…

    There is no reason to be wedded to any particular narrative put together by various people and for various motivations…some of this narrative is clearly problematic…for instance for the Romanian people and the origin of their language…

    The Serbs and Croats have similar objections with the prevailing historical narrative that the so-called ‘Slavs’ only came to the Balkans in the sixth century…people are re-examining a lot of these assumptions because they don’t really hold up anymore…

    Genetics now tells us that the so-called South Slavs are not really genetically Slavs at all…having more of the ancient proto-European DNA…and thus also confirming the Kurgan hypothesis…which btw pretty much obliterated the previous and quite ridiculous school of thought…for more on this see prof Anthony’s The Horse, the Wheel and Language…

    I’ve made this point a number of times here, but the present ‘history’ we have has already been majorly revised by REAL SCIENCE…there is no reason to be melting down here like many are because these stories that people have been brought up with turn out to be wide of the mark…

    As Archeology, anthropology, genetics and linguistics work continues, a lot of these tales will be exposed for the bullshit they are…that the story of of the ‘classical world’ turns out to be among them will not surprise me in the least…

    • Replies: @antibeast
  349. Jtgw says:

    The etymologies look wrong. Eg can’t find any corroboration to the claim that Ju-piter is related to Julius or Yule. Raises suspicions about the other revisionist claims.

  350. @22pp22

    I appreciate Unz Review’s openness to officially forbidden discourses, some of which interest me, and on which some pieces published here turn out to be — to me — worth reading.

    But the ratio of haters and dead-horse-beaters and cranks and hobby-horse riders and hysterics and axe-grinders and shady fakes etc. etc. is problematically high, so that my visits are less and less frequent and more and more selective.

    (They have proven to me, however, that one tremendously tedious and boring and stupid thing that anti-Semites and pro-Semites are in total agreement about is that it’s all about the Jews.)

    I looked at this article because it’s a field that engages me.

    If someone who spoke only Polish decided to lecture me all about the issue of the authorship of Two Noble Kinsmen, it would demonstrate — without need for further evidence — his utter stupidity and oblivious presumption. The same is true about this article’s post-Volusine cacata carta.

    • Replies: @22pp22
  351. @V. K. Ovelund

    I didn’t “blame” anyone. If I did it would be the anonymous author for wasting readers’ time with this drivel and Unz for publishing it — he’s smart enough to know better, or so I thought.

    I agree with you about the “cratering of trust in authority,” but what’s needed is neither pervasive distrust nor all-credulous trust but instead, thoughtful, inquiring, skeptical discernment.

    A society — for instance — which can be sold on Alexander Hamilton as a hero of democracy is one which has lost not only respect for facts, but contact with the idea of facts. “It’s all spin.”

    On “spin” see Julian Benda’s La Trahison des clercs (1927).

    An equally problematical aspect of the “bigger story” is the idea evinced above in over 300 comments on this article that anyone’s “opinion” on any subject, whether they know a lick about it or not, is “valid,” deserves a hearing, is worthy of respect. This isn’t distrust of authority so much as faith in ignorance and oblivious presumption. Which are also dangerous.

    See also my comment above #358. “Cacata carta” is Catullus and means “beshatten pages”.

  352. Seraphim says:
    @FB

    The ‘problem’ of the ‘origins of the Romanian language and people’ was a scientific thicket, a cultural conundrum and a political minefield, incompletely cleared even today. An Italian linguist, specialist in Romance languages with special interest in the Romanian language, Carlo Tagliavini, called it ‘l’intricatissimo problema delle origini del Rumeno’ with ‘aspetti perfino enigmatici’. The French historian of the early Middle Ages and the later Roman Empire, Ferdinand Lot called the Romanian people ‘an enigma and a historical miracle’.
    It would be (it is, actually) difficult to get a clear picture of these intricacies without a more detailed knowledge of the long troubled history of the Carpatho-Balkano-Danubian-Pontic regions, a region situated on the fault line between the Latin-Catholic ‘West’ and the Greek-Slavic Orthodox ‘East’, both claiming to be the true and legitimate heirs of the ‘Roman Empire’ and both laying territorial claims on these regions and its people (clamors that the Treaty of Trianon was a rapt by Romanians of the ‘historical’ Hungarian lands being heard even today). The inhabitants must have been either ‘Latin’ or ‘Slavs’, Slavicized Latins, or Latinized Slavs, Romanians either a ‘bulwark of the West against Russian imperialism’, or a ‘spearhead of Russian imperialism’ against the ‘West’, Roman-Catholics induced in the Greek schism by the ‘Slavo-Greek’ hatred against the Catholic Church, or pristine Orthodox attracted by Catholicism (through Unia), according to the different political persuasions. Things are further complicated by the positioning of these regions on the trade route ‘from the Varangians to the Greeks’ and in the way of invasions of Turco-Mongolian peoples, some permanently settling among these populations. Hungarians are a case in point.
    For that reasons the native populations known in Antiquity as Getae and Daci must be ‘disappeared’, either by extermination by the conquering Romans, or by their complete ‘Romanization’ and subsequently by assimilation of Slavs and their claims on the land negated. Both theories proved to be wanting, proofs of the survival of the Dacians accumulating with the expansion of archaeological, ethnological and linguistic research.
    Now, the idea that the Daci spoke a Latin dialect prior to the Roman conquest was proposed at the beginning of the 20th century by the ‘controversial’ Transylvanian historian Nicolae Densusianu, an ardent Romanian patriot and irredentist. His thesis was furiously denied by the purist ‘Latinists’ afraid that it can ‘give water to the mill’ of the Pan-slavists (i.e. to ‘Russian imperialism’). But it was confirmed by the research of Mario Alinei who demonstrated, beyond any reasonable doubt imo, that the ‘Romance’ languages are not the result of a split of a phantomatic unitary ‘Vulgar Latin’, but evolutions of pre-Roman ‘italid’ or ‘latinoid’ dialects. Ditto the ‘Slavic’ languages are not the result of a split of an unitary Proto-Slav language, but particular evolutions of various Slavic dialects. The Romanian language is the result of a situation of bi-lingualism Latino-Slavic, which was the typical situation in ‘frontier’ regions like Carpatho-Danubia (for a better term), in fact multi-lingualism if we take in consideration the Greeks, Turks and even Germanics (Goths).
    This ‘cultural war’ continues today dressed in the verbiage of Sorosian ‘open society’, anti-nationalism, anti-Orthodoxism, ‘europenism’ and virulent Russophobia (Romania has to have anti-Russian missiles!). The fact that Ceausescu’s regime seemed to favor a national-communism with a ‘Dacian’ coloring is pouring oil on the fiery debate.

    • Thanks: ivan
  353. Iris says:
    @ariadna

    She taught Latin. Latin and Ancient Greek are minor modules in university Modern Languages curricula.

  354. 22pp22 says:
    @J. Alfred Powell

    I came to the same conclusions as you with no knowledge of Tacitus’s annals. All you need is a reasonably good reading knowledge of Latin (and in my case linguistics). I just didn’t feel the need to scorn everyone else on the comment thread.

    • Replies: @J. Alfred Powell
  355. @the shadow

    You are quite correct when you say that “forgery” implies the existence of an original. This is not, of course, always true since “Ossian,” is a “forgery” in the sense that it is not what it claims to be, that is, a translation of ancient Celtic writing. However, there is no original since it is made up. So “Ossian” is a fabrication, or a hoax in the form of creative literature. One never says that Hamlet is a “forgery.” Hamlet, actually, is based on a true story, that of a Scandinavian prince who saved himself from being wiped out, when his family was being systematically assassinated, by pretending to be mad. Similarly, the “Protocols of Zion” are not a forgery, but to call them a fabrication is misleading because they are actually political science in the form of creative literature. Also calling them a “Czarist Forgery” is doubly incorrect, since Czar Nicholas II thought that the Protocols were a calumny against the Jewish people, and so should be suppressed. We all know he was naive, and that he and his family were shot by a Jewish assassination squad in 1918 at the direct orders of Yakov Sverdlov in Moscow. A book in France published in the thirties said that the actual orders to assassinate the Czar came from the banker Jacob Schiff in New York. After all, Schiff was the main financier of the whole operation having invested twenty million of his own money in Trotsky and the Bolsheviks, according to his son. Not to mention the investments of Paul Moritz Warburg (“Daddy Warbucks”), Otto Kahn, and the others.

    So what are the Protocols? The framework is based on a chapter in a novel which is actually political propaganda about the coming Franco Prussian War written by a German Intelligence agent named Hermann Ottomar Friedrich Goedsche. He wrote under a pseudonym, Sir John Retcliffe. The novel in question was published in 1868 and is called “Biarritz.” “Biarritz” was serialized in translation in European newspapers, including in Russia, so, at the time, the original was actually well known to the literate public. The chapter in question is a scene that takes place in the Jewish cemetery of Prague. The spirit-ghosts of the Twelve Tribes of Judah and Israel appear in the cemetery at midnight every hundred years and listen to a progress report from each other and the respective world centers where they are stationed on their holy project of world domination as demanded by the God of Moses. The original project is clearly and easily found in Ezra’s Torah, and especially in the Book of Deuteronomy. So, if you like, you could call this “a forgery of the Hebrew Bible.” Except the difference is only in the artistic treatment. In the novel the conclave is spied upon by an Italian Kabbalist Jew who guides a scientifically curious German to witness the event. The upshot of the world domination that the ghosts are discussing can also be easily found in any standard description of what the world will be like when Moshiach, the Jewish Messiah finally comes: there is a one world Talmudic government centered in Jerusalem, the Third Temple, a world court, Jewish shariah, exalted Jews and the Noahide Laws for the non-Jewish dhimmi subjects serving them.

    What someone did, was take the chapter “At the Jewish Cemetery in Prague” and adapt to it the political arguments from a book named “The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu,” by a French Jew named Maurice Joly. That book is a polemic about the deeply manipulative politics of Napoleon III and the Second Empire. Today’s DNC and Soros are light years beyond that. The “Dialogue” was commissioned from Maurice Joly, a free lance journalist, by the Deep State incarnated in the French Masonic Lodge called Memphis Misraim, which was founded by Garibaldi. The important people of the time, the Minister of Justice Cremieux, various Rothschilds, belonged to that Lodge and that cabal, and Joly was a journalist hired to write their propaganda, as Theodor Herzl was a journalist hired to write propaganda for the Zionist movement, a movement in which he himself did not believe. Another journalist hired to write Zionist propaganda was Wilhelm Marr, and his contribution was the term “Antisemitism” which replaced the less catchy “Judeophobia” of Dr. Pinsker. When Joly was no longer useful he was eventually found shot, and the death was judged a “suicide” by the police. Herzl also died an untimely death once his work was done.

    The “Protocols” take the “Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu” out of the context of French politics of the time, and move them up to a higher level. There is more modern and universal mind control, propaganda and political manipulation methods and psy-ops. How well and accurately it was done was not immediately apparent when it was first published in Russian in 1905 as “The Great within the Small and Antichrist, an Imminent Political Possibility. Notes of an Orthodox Believer.” But after the Dreyfus Psy-Op, the Bolshevik Revolution, World War I, the destruction of old Europe, and the Balfour Declaration, the genius of the work became apparent to all and its publisher, Sergey Nilus, was shot by the Bolsheviks. No one knows who actually created this intelligent political analysis, although Nilus certainly deserves the credit. But it is no forgery, unless you think that the Ghosts of the Twelve Tribes actually meet every hundred years in the Jewish cemetery of Prague and talk about something else.

    • Thanks: Hiram of Tyre
  356. Alba - says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    >this is what happen when you open the gate of the asylum like ” first milenium revisionist “have done .

    who will send them back now?

  357. Seraphim says:
    @ploni almoni

    The “At the Jewish Cemetery in Prague” is sufficient as origin of the ‘Protocols’. Occam’s Razor.

  358. Seraphim says:
    @antibeast

    If there is a Tacitean writing that can most attract the suspicion of Renaissance forgery, then it is precisely his ‘Germania’, which appeared just in time to support the grievances of ‘Germans’ against Italians extolling the virtues of the ‘Germans’ in contrast with the decadence and corruption of the ‘Romans’, therefore Italians. It was this minor text which prompted the German humanists to begin a search for the antiquity and glorious feats of their supposed ancestors, perversely hidden by the cunning Italians. It was to become a ‘bible’ of ‘Germanentum’, even for ‘Indo-Germanentum’ and “Pan-Germanism’.

  359. ivan says:
    @ploni almoni

    The order to kill the Romanovs came from Lenin. He didn’t like the monarchs anyway since their ancestors executed his brother Ulyanov, the so-called idealist. But there were straightforward tactical reasons : Lenin did not want to leave alive a potent focus for the Whites in the form of the Romanovs. But of course the Romanovs got their revenge, it was said that Lenin suffered from nightmares in the Kremlin, undoubtedly he is rotting away in Hell, having passed on just a year or so, after his dark deed. (One among countless others.)

  360. @22pp22

    Romanian: cultul lupilor “cult of the wolves.” The genitive plural as a cognate is clearly seen in the Latin version of the phrase, cultus luporum.

    If you can speak Romanian, you can watch the video about the cult of the wolves, apparently investigated by non other than Mircea Eliade himself.

    • Thanks: Peter Akuleyev
  361. Kapyong says:
    @Alden

    “The Vatican dug up the alleged grave of St Peter. Bones of a man in his 60s carbon 14 dated to first century AD were found. ”

    The alleged grave of St Peter was actually a gap between overlapping ancient walls, never considered a grave or tomb, discovered during renovations.

    In it was a pile of bones – including chicken, pig, and horse bones.

    As well as some bones from at least three different persons, including a long male leg bone – but NO complete skeletons, nor a single skull.

    That leg-bone is now called St Peter’s remains, and that gap with rubbish made a revered ancient tomb.

    • LOL: FB
  362. @Mr. Anon

    I hope you understand what a genetic fallacy is.

    Imagine judging an equation by the author’s handwriting. That’s how dumb you sound right now.

  363. ivan says:
    @Seraphim

    Yes all the mania for Germania seems to originate from Tacitus. Such are the power of words.

    I recall faintly that it was well covered in Simon Schama’s Landscape and Memory.

  364. antibeast says:
    @FB

    The issue of renaissance forgeries is just one part of it…

    The Anglo-Saxon version of Western history is completely contrived to make themselves look good as the center of their so-called “Western Civilization” which didn’t exist in ‘antiquity’ because it’s all made up to be “Fake History”.

    We have now a historical ‘narrative’ about this era of so-called ‘antiquity’ that has been put together in basically the last few centuries…most of Europe was without literacy until quite recently, in historical terms…much less a cohesive historical record…

    To have a complete view of ‘antiquity’, non-European sources of historiography have to be included as part of the historical narrative as opposed to the Anglo-Saxon practice of cherry-picking Western European history to support their ideological agenda of Nordic supremacy.

    As Archeology, anthropology, genetics and linguistics work continues, a lot of these tales will be exposed for the bullshit they are…that the story of of the ‘classical world’ turns out to be among them will not surprise me in the least…

    Here’s a genetic study of the human populations of ancient Rome spanning a period of 12,000 years:

    https://www.genengnews.com/news/dna-analysis-suggests-ancient-rome-represented-a-genetic-crossroads-of-europe-and-the-mediterranean/

    [MORE]

    An analysis of some of the earliest samples is in basic agreement with what has been found around Europe—and demonstrating an influx of farmers primarily descended from early agriculturalists from Turkey and Iran around 8,000 years ago, followed by a shift toward ancestry from the Ukrainian steppe somewhere between 5,000 and 3,000 years ago. “The first major ancestry shift in the time series occurred between 7,000 and 6,000 BCE, coinciding with the transition to farming and introduction of domesticates including wheat, barley, pulses, sheep, and cattle into Italy,” the scientists noted. “The second major ancestry shift occurred in the Bronze Age, between ~2,900 and 900 BCE … During this period, major technological developments increased the mobility of populations.” It was a period during which people had developed overland transport methods, including chariots and wagons, while advances in sailing technologies also “facilitated easier and more frequent navigation across the Mediterranean.” By the founding of Rome, traditionally dated to 753 BCE, the city’s population had grown in diversity and resembled modern European and Mediterranean peoples.

    Rome began as a humble city-state, the authors suggested. “Although there is no direct historical or genetic information about the origins of Rome, archaeological evidence suggests that in the early Iron Age, it was a small city-state, among many culturally and politically similar Etruscan and Latin neighbors. However, within 800 years Rome had gained control over an empire that extended to the west as far as Britain, south into North Africa, and east into Syria, Jordan, and Iraq. Archaeological evidence and contemporary accounts indicate that as the empire expanded there were connections between Rome and other areas in its domain, through trade, military campaigns, slavery, and transport routes. While this was borne out by the genetic evidence, the results also indicated that there was a huge shift in the ancestry of people who lived in Rome, but that this ancestry was primarily from the Eastern Mediterranean and Near East.

    The next few centuries appear somewhat turbulent. The empire split in two, diseases ravaged the Roman population, and the city was invaded more than once. Those events left their mark on the city’s residents, who shifted towards a western European ancestry. Later, the rise and reign of the Holy Roman Empire brought an influx of central and northern European ancestry. “During the Imperial period … the most prominent trend is an ancestry shift toward the eastern Mediterranean and with very few individuals of primarily western European ancestry,” the team noted. “One possible explanation for the predominance of gene flow from the east into Rome is the higher population density in the eastern Mediterranean than the west.”

  365. @antibeast

    Most precisely, thank you for your comment.

    I am reiteriating something you likely already know but it should be noted that the same Anglo-Saxons claimed to be the real descendants of “Lost Tribes”. It gave way to the cult of British Israelism and later official governmental policies for the creation of Israel. A prominent Jewish Romanian, Adolf Stern, had made the observation in his letters (currently in Israel’s national archives):

    “This is a Christian organization from Great Britain and the United States, in other words, from the Anglo-Saxon world, which, by means of Biblical-historical, ethnographical, archeological and linguistic proofs, establishes the presumption that the British (English) are direct descendants of the ten lost tribes of Israel.”

    […]

    In his article, Stern also discusses the Federation’s attitude to the Land of Israel and to the role of the British in Palestine. While the Balfour Declaration aspired to establish a national homeland and the writer of the Mandate even aimed for Jewish self-rule, the Federation saw itself as the exclusive heir to this territory. Neither the descendants of Ishmael – the Arabs, nor the Jews have any right to the land.

    https://blog.nli.org.il/en/lost_ten_tribes/

    On a side but related note; while the origin of British Israelism is uncertain, it appeared with the consolidation of the Church of England, the formation of Britain’s maritime empire and the creation of a secret intelligence service. That said, I can’t help but wonder if the fake history concocted by the Anglo-Saxons was their idea or the result of corrupted axioms implanted in their barbarian brains. I ask because the degenerate ideas that formed the cult of British Israelism did not exist before the Venetian oligarchy moved north to Europe (following their weakening in the war of the league of Cambria). The (Kabbalist) Venetians were masters at corrupting minds – they were instrumental in the creation of cults (Protestantism, Calvinism, Lutheranism, the Jesuit, etc), dividing people to pit them against each other in order to come up on top of the rubble. And so, I would speculate that they had an important role in the creation of British Israelism as well.

    • Replies: @antibeast
  366. Norbertus says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    There is plenty of historical evidence from the church fathers and archeological sources that Peter and Paul settled in Rome.
    New Testament books belong to the most accurate historical sources of antiquity.

    Who are those scholars on Byzantium that you mention? Can you please give names so that I could read those?

  367. @22pp22

    Discussion that takes this silly canard at face value deserves derision and delivering it doesn’t require a “demonstration” of expertise. The case is self evident to anyone capable of seeing it. But “cacata carta” will serve for one (a “demonstration”) if you want it. Sophocles says “judges are judged by their judgments” (it’s a play on dikê). Judge ye!

    Apropos “testa” compare French tête from Middle French “teste”.

    I have always loved Dante’s theory, in De Vulgare eloquentia, that Latin is an artificial language constructed by selection from the Romance languages. It’s a testament to the rigor of Latin grammar as presented by medieval pedagogues.

    There is a modern theory that Sanscrit was similarly constructed for “sacral elite” purposes.

    • Replies: @22pp22
  368. Alden says:
    @RichardTaylor

    All the art history I’ve ever read claims the statues were realistically painted.

  369. Alden says:
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    I had no idea I am so important. I’ll try to take over the Republican Party in time for the election.

    • Thanks: Daniel Chieh
  370. Alden says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    I read Black Athena, all of it. Right on the cover there was a blurb about the Afro Asiatic roots of Egyptian Greek and Roman civilization. I remember he didn’t claim the White Egyptians were black Africans but that black Africans created Egyptian architecture which went to Greece and then Rome. And then in to east Asia.

    A professor named Leftowitz came out with a total refutation of Bernal’s lies shortly after I read Bernal’s book. Didn’t need to read the Lefowitz book. I already knew Bernal’s book was just lies right out of the Black Muslim black history month version of history.

    • Replies: @Hiram of Tyre
  371. tiami says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    That’s all speculation I’m affraid. By 1000 AD Balkans were speaking Slavic. Dalmatia and Croatia 100%. Also don’t forget Balkan was never totally Romanised. People spoke both Latin and so called Illyrian (S. Slavic). Even christian lithurgy was in local language (S. Slavic) in Dalmatia, only such example in catholic world. As for Romanian language history there’s tons of evidence for Slavic and Cyrilic heritage. Slavic toponyms are all over Hungary, Romania, Greece and Albania and zero the opposite.

    • Agree: Jazman
    • Thanks: FB
    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
  372. @Seraphim

    For that reasons the native populations known in Antiquity as Getae and Daci must be ‘disappeared’, either by extermination by the conquering Romans, or by their complete ‘Romanization’ and subsequently by assimilation of Slavs and their claims on the land negated. Both theories proved to be wanting, proofs of the survival of the Dacians accumulating with the expansion of archaeological, ethnological and linguistic research.

    The mystery is complicated by the fact that about half a dozen Greek and Roman historians, from Procopius to Jordanes, equate the Getae and the Goths. Theodor Mommsen rejects the identification: “The Getae were Thracians, the Goths Germans, and apart from the coincidental similarity in their names they had nothing whatever in common.” But in fact, there are strong reasons to accept the identification. The Goths are supposed to have invaded Europe from today’s Ukraine, but before that, they are supposed to have come from Scandinavia. In reality, the “before that” part is totally speculative.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  373. @Grahamsno(G64)

    Thanks for this critic. One big problem with my article is that it is in three parts. In the third part, I will go beyond my working hypothesis in this first part. But bear in mind that I never claimed that ALL Roman litterature is fake. The dilemma goes like this: Even if we accept massive fraud (my point), not all Latin writing from Imperial Rome can possibly be fake (your point). Yet how can we explain that medieval monks laboriously copied these pagan works only to disregard them (Hochart’s point). The solution is to question the Scaligerian chronology using Gunnar Heinsohn’s stratigraphic demonstration: the 9th-century manuscripts were in reality roughly contemporary with the authors of their content. In other words, the Roman Empire was in reality roughly contemporary with the so-called Byzantine Empire (whose real name was Roman Empire). They were one and the same, until Rome strated to claim ascendancy, and, for that purpose, priority. I know it sounds crazy, and that is why I wanted to start by showing that much of what we think we know about the Roman Empire is a late fabrication. I will present a synthesis of Heinsohn’s work in the third part, but it can be read in English here: http://www.q-mag.org/gunnar-heinsohns-latest.html
    An introductory video here:

    • Thanks: Iris
    • Replies: @tiami
    , @Grahamsno(G64)
  374. @Kapyong

    LOL. It reminds me of the way the Pentateuch (or just the Deuteronomy, whatever), written by Moses himself, was discovered during renovation of the Jerusalem temple during Josiah’s reign (2Kings 22).

  375. @Hippopotamusdrome

    That was actually fascinating.

    I don’t know if I’d take the conclusions as far as those guys did, though. What’s more likely, that the Dead Sea Scrolls were faked and planted as part of a thousand-year conspiracy of the Templars and the Zionists and guarded ever since the Crusades, or that they were simply faked in 1947?

    I don’t even remember what the conspiratorial conclusion was they came to with regard to coins, but, again, clearly the easiest explanation is that pointy-headed nerdlingers have been going to Middle Eastern bazaars and getting fleeced by wily Arab coin merchants.

    And I’m not even opposed to wild conspiracy theories, but, I mean, come on.

  376. antibeast says:
    @Hiram of Tyre

    The Anglo-Saxons don’t have much history of their own and thus identity with the history of other peoples including the ancient Judeans who founded Christianity.

    Both British Israelism and its Anglo-American counterpart of Christian Zionism appear to be philosemitic but they’re actually antisemitic pseudo-religious movements which are by-products of the Anglo-Saxon ideology of Nordic Supremacy because they attempt to excise Judaism and the Semitic peoples from Israel.

    While the Balfour Declaration aspired to establish a national homeland and the writer of the Mandate even aimed for Jewish self-rule, the Federation saw itself as the exclusive heir to this territory. Neither the descendants of Ishmael – the Arabs, nor the Jews have any right to the land.

    In other words, both British Israelis and Anglo-American Christian Zionists support the State of Israel because they view Palestine as their promised land. By awaiting the second coming of their Aryan Christ to fulfill biblical prophesy, the Anglo-American Christian Zionists would establish the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Kingdom in Israel to rule the world.

    • Agree: Hiram of Tyre
    • Replies: @Hiram of Tyre
  377. Seraphim says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Now, you should realize that Jordanes equates the Goths with the Getae. He creates a fictitious history for the Goths appropriating the history, well known and documented, of the Getae and Daci. A clear case of falsification of history to boost the credentials of the Goths.
    The original homeland of the Goths must be located in the southernmost part of the Germanic territories, not in Scandinavia. Their presence in Ukraine and Dacia was the result of their installation there as ‘foederati’ by the Romans after their consecutive defeats in the 3d-4th century, where from they are driven out by the Huns and take refuge in the Roman Empire. They are then relocated to the West in Italy, Gallia, Spain. A tiny remnant remained in Crimea.

  378. @Grahamsno(G64)

    If Tacitus’ Annals were a forgery you’d think that the forgers would at least put Glowing descriptions of the Christians in Tacitus’ works especially since the main buyer of these works was the pope but we have a very negative description of the Christians in the Annals, an ‘abomination’ is what Tacitus calls them and can barely muster any sympathy for the the horrific treatment meted out to them by Nero. I think they are dismissed in 2 paragraphs in the Annals.

    This reminds me of how historians take historical sources as truthful if the author says anything deemed to be against his interest: i.e., if I confess to stealing once, but deny it a second time, I must therefore be telling the truth. Imagine being a fully grown adult human and not understanding the finer points of lying.

    To Tacitus: if lying Christians want Tacitus to prop up early Christian history, they might have him praise Christianity; but if they were more sophisticated liars, they might have this pagan frown on Christians, and thus seem more credible.

  379. Seraphim says:
    @Bleuazur

    You wouldn’t have asked this question had you read the report in its entirety. Never rush to conclusions.

    “The report does not cast doubt upon the authenticity of the Dead Sea Scrolls held by the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. These artifacts are among the most precious relics of the ancient world, first discovered in 1947 in a cave at Qumran, near the shores of the Dead Sea. Dated to around 2,000 years ago, most of the scrolls were written in Hebrew, though some were penned in Aramaic and Greek”.

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  380. antibeast says:
    @Seraphim

    Tacitus wasn’t the only one to write about the Germanics; Julius Caesar also wrote about them in his Gallic Wars where he compared them with the Gauls. While Tacitus tended to treat the Germanics as virtuous and noble, Julius Caesar viewed them as warlike savages who were beneath the civilized and wealthy Gauls. Tacitus had idealized the Germanics as some kind of Noble Savage which explains why German nationalists exploited his work as the basis for German identity.

  381. @Seraphim

    The original homeland of the Goths must be located in the southernmost part of the Germanic territories, not in Scandinavia. Their presence in Ukraine and Dacia was the result of their installation there as ‘foederati’ etc.

    Yes, that’s the conventional narrative. I came here to show it is full of holes. And it is not only Jordanes who “mistake” the Getae for the Goths, but: Marcellinus Comes, Orosius, John Lydus, Isidore of Seville, Procopius of Caesarea (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getae).
    But never mind the Goths, that’s another story.

    • Replies: @Virgil S
    , @Philip Owen
  382. Bleuazur says:
    @Seraphim

    I did read it entirely. Also does “not casting doubt about authenticity” really prove they’re authentic? Have they been investigated the same way?

    • Replies: @gT
    , @Seraphim
  383. Bleuazur says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    I also think history revisionism is something to be done, and I already read several books by Heribert Illig, who is rather convincing in his views. Then there is also Hans-Joachim Zillmer’s book ‘Kolumbus kam als letzter” that contains the idea of the invented Roman empire as well.

    Also following your link about Heinsohn, I read his biography, and to be honest, it doesn’t really build trust on me…
    https://www.q-mag.org/gunnar-heinsohnthe-creation-of-the-gods-sacrifice-as-the-origin-of-religion.html

  384. Kapyong says:
    @Bleuazur

    “Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls are fake!
    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/all-museum-bibles-dead-sea-scrolls-are-fake-report-finds-180974425/
    So what about the others ???”

    The original Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in those caves in the 1940s and after.

    The fake ones are totally different – they turned up just recently, with unknown provenance, and on rather different, and dubious, leather material. No problem with the earlier ones.

    BTW –
    faithful believers like to claim that the famous Isaiah scroll from the DSS is word-for-word 100% identical with the modern version.

    The facts are rather different – numerous Isaiah scrolls were found : including 1QIsa a, 1QIsa b, 4QIsa a and 4QIsa b. They all differ (all bible MSS differ from each other somewhat.)

    The famous Great Isaiah scroll is 1QIsa a.

    It has over 2600 differences to our modern copy, and is about 95% the same. NOT 100%, not word-for-word identical. Differences include letters, words and whole verses –

    “Strictly speaking, the number of textual variants is well over 2,600, ranging from a single letter, sometimes one or more words, to complete variant verse or verses. For example, the second half of Verse 9 and all of Verse 10 in the present Masoretic version of Chapter 2 are absent from the Great Isaiah Scroll in the Israel Museum’s full manuscript that you see here online. The same verses, however, have been included in other versions of the Book of Isaiah in the scrolls found near the Dead Sea (4QIsaa, 4QIsab), and the Hebrew text from which the ancient Greek version or Septuagint (3rd-1st century BCE) was translated. This confirms that these verses, although early enough, were a late addition to the ancient and more original version reflected in the Great Isaiah Scroll.”
    http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah

    But we can be sure that faithful believers will continue to repeat the faithful belief that it is 100% identical.

    Kapyong

  385. vot tak says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    “I have written, under my real name, on subjects regarding recent history which I consider much more important today. Fully aware that this “first millennium revisionism” is highly controversial and of little urgency, I do not wish to provide an easy argument to the opponents of my other research.”

    That’s what I figured. The author doesn’t want this psychological experiment on people’s susceptibility to con jobs to sully his other writing work. People would compare and ask the obvious question:

    If he wrote one bogus article about Romans, what guarantee do we have that all of his writing is not also a con job?

    Got it. ;-D

    BTW, that other identity wouldn’t be jimmy moglia, would it?

  386. Virgil S says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Wulfila’s translation of the Bible into Gothic, dated between the 4th and 8th century AD, shows Gothic to be a Germanic language. In contrast Herodothus said the Getae were Thracians. And Strabo wrote that the Getae and the Dacians spoke the same language. The surviving lexical terms in Thracian are not Germanic.

  387. @ploni almoni

    That is an interesting account of the Origin of the Protocols, but it has nothing to do with my comment that was focused on and pointed to the distinction between forgeries and fabrications with reference to the issues raised by the documents about Roman history being forgeries. I however never in this comment mentioned the “Protocols.” I instead referred to and likened the contents of the documents he referred to as being like the holohoax if they were fabrications of Roman history rather forgeries that I posed to ask what then is real about Roman history or were all or most parts just made up about Roman history? That same question could obviously be extended and applied to what is the true history of the holocaust if the tales about it are fabrications that I never actually posed, but it was implicit in the comments I made.

    I also pointed to how the forgers who gained access to real documents may have based their “forgeries” or fabrications on them by sprinkling into the manuscripts they fabricated falsehoods that padded the originals with what comported with the views of the rulers or powerful men willing to pay for such updated documents that I also likened to Plato’s Noble Lie that were designed to serve their current interests.

    And then how did I explain that all the original documents that had allegedly been only copied were all now missing? The forgers would obviously have to destroy them to avoid being exposed by originals turning up and discrediting the forgeries if they had indeed forged them.

    So from my account about forgeries and fabrications, you jumped to the tale of the Protocols and sort of took issue with how my account of forgeries and fabrications didn’t really apply to the Protocols that you presented that sought to “authenticate” them by providing an interesting account of its literary history that you end with your conclusion that

    No one knows who actually created this intelligent political analysis, although Nilus certainly deserves the credit. But it is no forgery, unless you think that the Ghosts of the Twelve Tribes actually meet every hundred years in the Jewish cemetery of Prague and talk about something else.

    So then despite the literary history you provided, its author remains shrouded in mystery, except you wish to make it appear it can’t have been the real elders of Zion who are presented in the document only in a fictionalized form.

    But the mystery author created an intelligent political analysis. Not only intelligent, but very prescient.

    So let me suggest the real point, purpose, and history of this “mystery” document. It is, indeed, neither a forgerery nor a fabrication. It is, instead, the blueprint for action devised and prepared by those presented as its imaginary authors who are dressed up as apparitions meeting in a cemetary where they spell out in great detail the plans they must execuye to attain power to dominate the world.

    So as with the fabricators of documents who would have to destroy originals they used to prevent the exposure of their fabrications, what would those who created and published the blueprint as a guide to be implemented by their adherents do to maintain the secret designs embedded in their published conspiracy for dominating the world?

    After all, there is their plan openly published for the world to see; as the plan unfolds, don’t you think some might notice that the blue print is being executed exactly as detailed by the very people the plan identifies as being behind it; and don’t you imagine with the vidence of having in hand the plan as well as proof of its implementation, the public would come to realize who is behind it, turn on them with a vengeance and tear them apart for seeking to dominate them?

    So how do you hide the incriminating document that you have placed before the public for all to see that fully exposes what you are up to?

    Any clue at all?

    Well, let me suggest that the surest way to hide the plan they have laid out for all to see to enlightent their fellow conspirators about their plan so they can clearly follow and implement it effectively is to denounce it as and anit-Semitic “forgery” or “fabrication” that is designed to falsely demonize the Jews. Once you sell that tale, the plan is safe because no one will dare to believe it to avoid being denounced as an anti-Semite.

    Thanks for the exposition that exposes far more than you thought.

  388. @dfordoom

    Once you accept one conspiracy theory you’re more likely to accept others.

    My advice would be to give conspiracy theorists half a chance. Not to abandon all discretion, but to give half a chance. Here is why.

    On the one hand, I believe that you are right to observe,

    Conspiracy theories are for people who either do not understand how things actually work, or do not want to accept the real explanations for things.

    On the other hand, I believe that you are right to observe,

    Both politicians and the media often lie to us.

    Evidence (to borrow your example) that the moon landings were faked does not happen to impress me any more than it impresses you; but when you write,

    It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that American politicians are anything other than corrupt whores….

    I happen to see this differently than you do.

    I do not, however, think you crazy. I just disagree. I can see why you might see it as you do.

    So then you write,

    It’s also foolish and dangerous to believe crazy conspiracy theories about Jewish plots or Bolshevik plots or that COVID-19 was a dastardly Chinese Communist plot or that Putin stole the election in 2016 or to believe nonsense like pizzagate or that Lyndon Jonson was responsible for JFK’s assassination or that the moon landing or the Holocaust were hoaxes.

    Suppose that I had come to another view regarding Jews and the Holocaust, though on the other points you and I align. Does the divergence make me crazy in your view?

    That is, is it so obviously mad that one would think, “Well, blacks as a group tend to behave in certain ways, and Gypsies as a group tend to behave in certain ways, and white Gentiles—well, they come in all kinds but, taken together, they tend to behave in certain ways, too. Why not Jews? And if so, then who says that all the ways Jews behave are good for the rest of us? Jeff Zucker is a Jew. Harvey Weinstein is a Jew. Adam Schiff is a Jew. You have bad Gentiles, too, but maybe the matter bears closer scrutiny nevertheless.”

    If the last is obviously mad, then I don’t really know what to say.

    Now suppose that I had read eminent philo-Semite and anti-Nazi William Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich from cover to cover twice (it’s a great book); suppose that I had multiple, decades-long Jewish friends, unrelated to one another, who had consistently treated me and my family well; and suppose that I still thought Jews as a group to be civilization wreckers and the Holocaust to be largely a fable.

    Is it impossible that, whether right or wrong, I had some rational basis for my belief?

    I admit that madness is a real thing. I have never pretended to be 100 percent sane. I do not ask others to pretend to be 100 percent sane, either. Discretion is necessary, but censorship is choking us these days. If you loosened the choke a bit, expanding the boundaries on what ideas can be considered without censure and ridicule, I believe that this would help.

    Regarding “people who … do not understand” (your words, quoted above), you are right that conspiracy theories are used to cover lack of understanding. Insinuations of madness however are equally used to cover lack of understanding. The chief difference is that conspiracy theories are low status and typically good natured, whereas insinuations of madness are neutral status and sometimes vicious.

    Now of course I do not think you vicious. You plainly are not, so consider the following character, as reported by The New York Times Magazine (paywalled) in the summer of 2007:

    Victor Carey, a 45-year-old, muscular, mustachioed self-described “patriot” who wears a black baseball cap with a skull and crossbones on it, drove up from Sykesville, Md., to show his support for [Ron] Paul. He laid out some of his concerns. “The people who own the Federal Reserve own the oil companies, they own the mass media, they own the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, they’re part of the Bilderbergers, and unfortunately their spiritual practices are very wicked and diabolical as well,” Carey said. “They go to a place out in California known as the Bohemian Grove, and there’s been footage obtained by infiltration of what their practices are. And they do mock human sacrifices to an owl-god called Moloch. This is true. Go research it yourself.”

    The inimitable John Derbyshire observes, “That word ‘unfortunately’ is a rhetorical master stroke.” Meanwhile, though, lovable loons like Carey are exactly who has not dragged and would never drag our country, the United States, into the proverbial ditch.

    Carey is low status. I get that. The trouble with announcing that the man is crazy is that the announcement tends to mark the caller as a vain seeker of status.

    And no one likes a vain seeker of status. People like Carey, rather. Carey is not cruel. Carey is not destructive. We all sort of know that the writer who wrote the paragraph to mock Carey probably is cruel and destructive. Ironically, Carey is likely to be competent at whatever underpaid job he is employed to do, whereas the paragraph’s overpaid writer is unlikely to be competent at much of anything except mocking his moral betters. One prefers a man like Carey for this reason alone.

    Once you go down the rabbit hole you’re in Lewis Carroll’s reality.

    But has our whole country not been dragged down the rabbit hole into Lewis Carroll’s reality? Carrol’s reality is not a very edifying place. We do not want to be here; but, since we are, we might as well take a look around.

    That is the function The Unz Review serves: it lets us take a look around.

    However, one can hardly look around without giving conspiracy theorists half a chance. Not abandon all discretion, but give half a chance; for, amid all the nonsense, one just might discover an idea or two worth considering.

    The unappealing alternative is to be dragged through the rabbit hole with the blindfold still firmly bound to one’s face, while the high-status Jake Tappers and Don Lemons of the world continue to smirk while shouting lie after lie after lie straight into one’s ear.

    If that is the choice, then I prefer to associate with the crazies.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  389. Ron Unz says:
    @dfordoom

    It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that all those American wars really have been fought for freedom and democracy. It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that American politicians are anything other than corrupt whores. It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that scientists always tell the truth (nobody can be relied upon to tell the truth if it’s in their own financial or career interests to lie).

    It’s also foolish and dangerous to believe crazy conspiracy theories about Jewish plots or Bolshevik plots or that COVID-19 was a dastardly Chinese Communist plot or that Putin stole the election in 2016 or to believe nonsense like pizzagate or that Lyndon Jonson was responsible for JFK’s assassination or that the moon landing or the Holocaust were hoaxes.

    Well, as in most things it’s best to evaluate “conspiracy theories” on a case-by-case basis. Most are certainly false, quite a number are probably true, and with many it’s difficult to say one way or another.

    I’d assume you’re already quite familiar with my American Pravda series, but others new to this website might want to take a look at my analyses of various historical topics and then decide for themselves:

    https://www.unz.com/page/american-pravda-series/

    • Agree: JackOH
  390. johnm33 says:
    @UncommonGround

    I recalled later that Rohl identified it as Khufus palace, identical to the biblical discription of Solomons, he speculated that its grandeur was borrowed for narrative purposes, i speculated that maybe Solomon lived there and built the great pyramid.

  391. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    but when you write,

    It’s foolish and dangerous to believe that American politicians are anything other than corrupt whores….

    I happen to see this differently than you do.

    I should point out that I have nothing against whores. They’re just trying to make a living. If you have sex with a whore and she tells you, “OMG that was fantastic. You’re the best I ever had. And you’re so big!” you know she’s lying but it’s a harmless lie and it’s part of her job. Her job is not just to have sex with you but to make you feel good about it (assuming she’s any good at her job). You can still regard her as basically an honest whore. On the other hand if she tells you it’s going to cost you two hundred bucks and then takes the $200 and she then steals your wallet she’s a dishonest whore.

    To some extent it’s the same with politicians. You expect them to lie because it’s part of their job. Sometimes they tell lies that are transparent and harmless. Those politicians are honest whores. Sometimes they steal your wallet and then help themselves to your bank account, and wreck your country and loot it. Those politicians are dishonest whores. But all politicians in a democracy are whores, because democratic politics is political prostitution.

    • LOL: Iris
  392. @First Millennium Revisionist

    Beowulf met the Geats on the North Sea coast. Several of their kings are named in the story.

  393. 22pp22 says:
    @J. Alfred Powell

    I get the impression you are an academic in the humanities. So was I. So was Ron Unz. There are two ways of doing the job.
    1). Scoring intellectual points. Demonstrating how much better you re than the next guy. Even in viva voce examinations, you often find that the examiners are less interested in examining the student than parading their own intellectual superiority. I once got frustrated, and said, “It’s not about you, it’s about the student.”
    2). Being an educator. Explain things to people who don’t know. Why would someone know about Altaic linguistics who isn’t scholar of Altaic languages? And avoid politics it at all possible. Even in the humanities, there are so many technical skills you need to impart that there should be no time left over for indoctrination.
    Try to be the latter. All right, you end up hearing a lot of rubbish, but that’s life. If you are outstanding in you field, you don’t need to rub it in. It’s obvious.
    And bear in mind that no profession on earth has done more harm than ours. America is imploding, and you can lay the blame squarely at the feet of pompous, malevolent academics, who would quickly starve if left to their own devices.

    • Replies: @J. Alfred Powell
  394. dfordoom says: • Website
    @V. K. Ovelund

    However, one can hardly look around without giving conspiracy theorists half a chance.

    There are several things you need to do when judging conspiracy theories. Firstly you look at the prevailing official view. Is it plausible? Is there a fairy large amount of evidence from multiple sources to support the official view? Is there a mix of different kinds of sources (oral, documentary and physical evidence). Does the official view stand up pretty well or does it seem dubious?

    Then you look at the conspiracy theory. Is it plausible? Is there any actual hard evidence for it or is it merely wild speculation? Are there multiple sources of evidence? Do any of the sources seem even vaguely reliable?

    Then you ask yourself, do the people promoting the conspiracy theory have an obvious axe to grind?

    And finally you ask yourself – does the conspiracy theory actually provide a more satisfactory explanation than the official story?

    If you look at the conspiracy theories that are popular on the Right the only one that seems credible is the idea that global warming is largely a hoax.

    • Agree: Ron Unz
    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
  395. Mark Hunter says: • Website
    @Hiram of Tyre

    In the 19th century … the … Anglo-Saxon ruling class claimed the ancient Greeks and the Romans were Germans. The historical Eastern migration was replaced with an invented one from the North.

    Eastern migration or not there are a lot of blondes in the Iliad.

    • Replies: @Hiram of Tyre
  396. @Wood Stove

    Thank you for that.

    Yes, the ‘cool rich kids’ who have passed money, property and satanism down to their progeny for a thousand years and more are real vermin.

    We can all rest assure and sleep easy knowing they all immediately descend to hell upon the end of this short live. After their initial reception in Hell, can you imagine what a hazing in Hell looks and feels like. the real fun begins. Kissinger, Rothschilds, all the sell out celebrity vermin….Just being around those people for an eternity would be a form of hell.

  397. @22pp22

    I am not an academic and this isn’t a classroom or an oral examination — where the all purpose examiner’s question is “Tell me what I want to hear.”

    I agree fully and moreso about the damage done by hired liars both on and off campus. Schools are learning’s biggest enemies. Institutionalized “scholarship” loves authority and hates truth. So do most “teachers.”

  398. @Alden

    I concur but would add one other agent: Islam.

    The rise of Islam led to the loss of Mare Nostrum. The Mediterranean ceased to be a European dominated trade area and became an Islamic one. Europeans ceased to be participants in trade; in fact, they became part of the trade itself- as slaves. This had a significant effect in moving the centre of Roman civilization east to Greece as the Empire contracted with the decline in trade.

    This period is seen very differently by Classical scholars and Byzantine scholars. Both, however, fail to really illustrate how devastating an effect Islam had on European development and how bloody and violent this process was. The first foreign policy issue that the American nation faced was the Barbary pirates. Think about that. Even in the late 18th century, the Moors were inflicting huge losses on European traders in either theft by piracy or bribes. From the late 7th century, when Islam left the Arabian peninsula and attacked and consumed the territories previously held by either Persia or the Romans, all the way to the 18th century. The story is one of a massive shift in civilization from Roman and Persian Empires to a series of Islamic Caliphates that attempted and ultimately failed to swallow up the civilized world and this story is largely ignored if not completely denied.

    Babbling on about Roman history that didn’t happen?
    Really.

    • Agree: Seraphim
    • Replies: @Ivan
  399. @Bleuazur

    I know. But I recommand to ignore his early work, which is totally unconnected to his research from 2011.

  400. tiami says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Be careful with Heinsohn’s views because some of his claims are quite absurd like Augustus and Diocletian being contemporaries (except if what he really wants to say is that Augustus is fake like presented by Tim Cullen here https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/08/20/a-for-augustus/). Or his blind belief in authenticity of literal material (there can’t be only 300 years of real Roman history and 1500 of literal works etc). Also his belief and defending of Christian narrative is suspicious to me.

    And since you touched on Fomenko who has really strange view on antiquity and doesn’t deal with it much, are you familiar with the work of great NA Morozov (http://vvu-library.ru/morozov/index.htm)? Many of Fomenko’s findings are actually Morozov’s which Fomenko twisted to suit his bizare agenda.

    Thanks again for your article and looking forward to next one.

  401. @dfordoom

    If you look at the conspiracy theories that are popular on the Right the only one that seems credible is the idea that global warming is largely a hoax.

    To consider global warming a hoax would imply that the majority of the scientific establishment in modern times would be in cahoots to promote a false thesis, and theories to support it, in the name of some veiled interest which they mysteriously should have in common. We’re talking of dozens of scientists belonging to different, and often largely unrelated, institutions, and of an academic system that was built on strict rules that were designed to ensure their independence and reliability, working against powerful interests which have a common goal of making money at the expense of the planet.

    It’s funny that anyone should consider that *less* implausible than anything proposed in this article about historical events which occurred millennia ago.

    Obviously those climatologists may be wrong. It happens. Empirical evidence so far doesn’t point in that direction though. It’s also obvious that the strategies to fight global warming may be partly or entirely wrong, but that is a different matter altogether.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
  402. @tiami

    Everything you’ve mentioned is true, and supports the “immigration” theory – that Romanian was imported into modern Romania early in the second millennium by Romance speakers who had already lived side by side with South Slavic speakers for generations in the Western Balkans and left (or were driven out). Romanian has a lot of Slavic borrowings from the South Slavic branch (ancestral to Serbian/Bulgarian) but curiously almost none from the East (Ukrainian/Russian) or West Slavic (Slovak/Polish) branches, both of which border and are intermingled with modern Romania.

    • Replies: @tiami
  403. Norbertus says:
    @Digital Samizdat

    Haha, I was also thinking in the direction of the Saker, which I love to read, except when he begins on the papacy. But it is certainly not him.

  404. Norbertus says:
    @R2b

    There is enough evidence in Tradition that Peter went to Rome. So that the Church was founded on the rock of Peter in both a literal and a symbolic sense.

    • Replies: @Kapyong
    , @R2b
  405. @Brás Cubas

    Can I nominate you for university president? I would like to.

    We’re talking of dozens of scientists belonging to different, and often largely unrelated, institutions, and of an academic system that was built on strict rules that were designed to ensure their independence and reliability….

    I so wish that it truly worked that way!

    The ideal system you describe is admittedly not wholly fictional, but is nevertheless mostly fictional, I fear. Most scientists are more or less decent persons but the ones who worm their way to grossly overpaid leadership positions at the tops of the institutions of which you speak are generally not so decent. If you have never worked under such persons, then you may not understand the incredible tenacity with which such persons will exploit every available tool, trick and trap to block one from being hired or to cause one to be fired when they suspect one’s ideological reliability.

  406. tiami says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Ok but how much we REALLY know about pre 15-16th century languages on territory of today’s Romania? Both continuity and immigration theories make little sense to me. Use of cyrilic alphabet, very late Romanian grammar written by ”archenemies” of South Slavs Habsburgs (also connection with Venetians) and lots of Slavic words speaks volumes though. Don’t forget that modern genetic research showed that pretty much same people inhabited this part of Europe and that large scale immigartion from Serbia or Croatia is not recorded in history books. If S. Slavic language influence is much stronger than Western or Easter Slavic then this mystery is solved. And the one who Goths really were.

  407. @dfordoom

    It might work like this for people who are merely consumers of “conspiracy theories”, who read them and evaluate them, according to their standards and belief systems.
    But it doesn’t work like this for genuine truth-seekers, who elaborate those “conspiracy theories”. It starts when you realize that there are inconsistencies in the prevailing theory. If you are curious and serious, you investigate. If at some point you judge that the inconsistencies are too many, then you conclude that the prevailing theory is false. At this point, you still don’t have an alternative “conspiracy theory”. That’s another stage: you might start with working hypotheses, and finally settle, or not, on some fairly consistent theory.
    Anyway, “conspiracy theory” is an expression for cheap thinkers. Although somewhat convenient (the CIA found it convenient when then made it up), is more or less devoid of precise meaning.
    I don’t understand why that expression “conspiracy theory” is applied to my article. Did I mention of a conspiracy? As a matter of fact, I don’t believe that the distortion of history is primarily due to a conspiracy, though I believe (my next article) that at some point, the dominant cultural power in Western Europe did have an interest in fabricating historical. Is that “conspiracy theory”?

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund, tiami
  408. @Virgil S

    You’ve got a point. Linguistically, it doesn’t fit.
    You might want to check what Heinsohn says in “Goths of the 4th century and Getae of the 1st century: are they one and the same?” But if you’re not familiar with his work, it might be difficult to grasp, you have to get the full picture.

  409. @vot tak

    For what I wrote under my real name, I got fired from my teaching job. I should have used a pseudo and keep my real name for this one. And you, what is your justification for using a pseudo? Jimmy Moglia? Never heard. Try again.

    • Replies: @vot tak
    , @V. K. Ovelund
  410. @V. K. Ovelund

    Maybe I wasn’t sufficiently clear or articulate, but your reply simply doesn’t address my main objection.

    OK, universities may be as corrupt as you like, but how can they be so cohesive *against* big money in this particular topic? That’s a mystery of the highest order. Corruption tends to favor who pays most, and of course big corporations do not want to limit their carbon emissions. In the worst (for my hypothesis) scenario, corruption would be randomly oriented, favoring all parties equally. That is not what is happening.

  411. vot tak says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Thanks for the confirmation. 😀

    • Disagree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Iris
  412. Iris says:
    @dfordoom

    Then you ask yourself, do the people promoting the conspiracy theory have an obvious axe to grind?

    This is surprisingly reductive. Most genuine truth-seekers are motivated by ethical principles, and are appalled by the fate of those who end up on the receiving end of institutional conspiracies.

    Those who consider “conspiracy theories” merely as an intellectual exercise have problems in the morals department.

  413. Sparkon says:
    @Brás Cubas

    Corruption tends to favor who pays most, and of course big corporations do not want to limit their carbon emissions.

    There are no “carbon emissions.” Carbon (C) is a solid and cannot be emitted, at least by man. Obviously, you are thinking of carbon dioxide, CO₂, which is a trace gas emitted by many natural processes, and also by some of man’s activities, such as lighting and heating our homes, and breathing.

    The oceans on Earth are the planet’s largest sink of CO₂. As the oceans warm up, they outgas carbon dioxide in the same way your soda or beer loses its carbonation and goes flat as it warms up.

    We know it has gotten warmer naturally since the Little Ice Age. It should be no surprise then that atmospheric CO₂ has increased as the oceans have gotten warmer.

    In any event, none of the many expensive and counterproductive actions undertaken to “fight global warming” has had any effect at all on rising atmospheric CO₂, but these actions have made everything much more expensive for everyone, as electricity is the lifeblood of modern civilization.

    • Agree: Mike P, dfordoom, mark green
  414. Ram says:

    A lot of breath wasted trying to figure out which language came first. According to a knowitall it is Arabic that is spoken by the divinity. However, Uttum Pishthum is up there to translate them all.

  415. Nicucino says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    Why would Constantine have these statues of Dacians on his monument erected more than two centuries after Traian’s defeat of the Dacians? There are 8 significant statues of Dacians on the Constantine’s monument. Four in the front and 4 in the back.
    Why is it that one can see lots and lots of statues of Dacians all over Rome? Why Dacians and not other defeated nations such as Goths or Alemanis or Franks, etc.?
    I think that a revisionist theory is indeed due. The honor given to Dacians in Rome is beyond me.

  416. Ivan says:
    @TheTrumanShow

    Sure hoaxed the Japanese.

  417. Ivan says:
    @steinbergfeldwitzcohen

    I think it was the historian Henri Pierrine who made the point that loss of links to Egypt in the aftermath of the Islamic conquest was devastating to the scholars in Europe. They lost the source of cheap papyrus, literally the paper of that era. Imagine how difficult it would have been to replace papyrus with parchment and sheepskin. That all by itself would have set back literacy in Europe by some distance. Einstein is supposed to have said that his pencil was smarter than him. Meaning that with his pencil he is more effective by multiples than without to recall and add to his cogitations.

    Let us add this to the sterling record of the many ways the Muslims preserved learning during the “Dark Ages” in Europe.

    • Replies: @Iris
  418. @Nicucino

    Because they fought the Dacians a lot?
    It is much easier to explain than why someone would dedicate a monument to an emperor who did not exist using a fabricated dating system.

    • Replies: @Nicucino
  419. Iris says:
    @vot tak

    It is easy to guess who the FMR is. And his credentials are real and very impressive. All the best.

    • Replies: @vot tak
  420. Kapyong says:
    @Norbertus

    “There is enough evidence in Tradition that Peter went to Rome. “

    Tradition is the Christian word for beliefs not supported by any actual evidence.

    • Replies: @Norbertus
  421. Nicucino says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Regarding the origin of the Romanian language and hence the Dacian language, there is a good scholastic research/book by Andre du Nay: The Origins of the Rumanians. The book can be downloaded electronically:
    https://www.scribd.com/document/88891068/Andre-du-Nay-The-Origins-of-the-Rumanians

    Ignoring the fact that the author may be coming from a Hungarian background trying to show a discontinuity of the Romanian presence in Transylvania (a political issue!), or their late arrival in Transylvania, one can use nevertheless his very good analysis on the language side of things.

    Key is the similarities between today’s Romanian and today’s Albanian in about 100+ core semantic words.

    The fact that Albanian is assumed to originate from Illirian, and further assuming that Illirian is related to Dacian/Tracian, can be used to further dig into the true origin of the Dacian language.

  422. Mike P says:
    @Brás Cubas

    OK, universities may be as corrupt as you like, but how can they be so cohesive against big money in this particular topic? That’s a mystery of the highest order.

    Do you really not see that big money is all-in on the climate scam? Yes, some companies that get shafted are cautiously critical. However, the entire globalist propaganda machine is on board, as are many industrial companies.

    Quite apart from that question, there is easy grant money and therefore fame for scientists who buy into this scam. No matter how absurd and irrelevant the research, it will get funded as long as it promotes the global warming narrative. Universities are nothing more than whorehouses these days.

    • Agree: dfordoom, ivan
    • Disagree: Brás Cubas
  423. Nicucino says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    Hi Kent, try do a search on the net for statues of either Dacians/Persians/Parthians/Goths/Franks in ancient Rome and see what you get. The difference between Dacians and everybody else combined is enormous. The number of Dacian statues in Rome is overwhelming. Most of the history we know today is that the Romans fought others (persians, alamani, franks, gauls, goths, etc.) a lot more than they did the Dacians. I think there is lot more into the story of Dacian involvement into the Roman empire than meets the eye.

    By the way, the Arch of Septimius Severus is also full of Dacians.

    About Constantine, I do not see any good reason for doubting his very existence. The first Christian ecumenical council was organized by Constantine. I suspect that there is a strong documentation about that (not only Western but mostly in the East, in the Orthodox Church) and later about his mother, Helen which was also declared a saint. A good read is also the books of Ammianus Marcellinus, the Greek historian mentioned also by FMR in his article, who describes a lot of stuff about Constantine among other things…

    • Thanks: Iris
    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  424. @Nicucino

    I have read Ammianus Marcellinus, but you are mistaken about him; his history begins after the reign of Constantine

  425. @Nicucino

    Why Dacians and not other defeated nations such as Goths or Alemanis or Franks, etc.?

    Heinsohn’s answer, consistent with Jordanes and other sources, is in his online article “Goths of the 4th century and Getae of the 1st century: are they one and the same?” But, as Virgil S points out (#398), it is linguistically problematic.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  426. @tiami

    I don’t accept everything Heinsohn says. He does lack some perspective, especially on religions, I agree. His strong point is archeology and stratigraphy. He doesn’t, in general, claim to know who existed and who didn’t, but points out that some historical sequences which are believed to be consecutive must in fact be simultaneous. It must be considered that names are often not reliable markers. Augustus, as I pointed out, is not a personnal name, so the question of Augustus’ existence is not a simple question. As far as I remember on this point, Heinsohn would tend to say that Augustus and Diocletian are contemporaries, but I would rather tend to say that Augustus is a fiction. My own perspective, which is not Heinsohn’s, is that Roman history is, to a large extent, a retroprojected mirror image of Byzantine history. To get the best perspective on the Mediterranean world during the first millenium, one should position oneself in Constantinople. Making Rome the center of the ancient world is the great illusion projected by the medieval Roman curia (and then by Italian humanists whose genius was largely plundered from Contantinople).
    Regarding the limited trust we should put in names, here is a funny example, suggested by Fomenko (vol. 2, p. 49): Pontius Pilate is Pilate of Pontus. Since “the word ‘pilat’ used to mean ‘hangman, tormentor’, in the ord Russian language—hence Russian word ‘pilati—to torture, tyrannize’,” thus Pontius Pilate is “the state official who administers justice and manages hangmen” in the Pontic region. Sounds plausible enough.
    I wish I could read Russian and learn more about Morozov.

    • Thanks: FB
    • Replies: @tiami
    , @Seraphim
  427. gT says:
    @Bleuazur

    I read somewhere that the Dead Sea Scrolls held by the Israel Museum in Jerusalem never leave Israel, so no outsider has verified their authenticity.

    Probably if they do leave the museum the Mossad goons keep a close watch to prevent anyone from obtaining a sample for analysis.

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  428. @First Millennium Revisionist

    For what I wrote under my real name, I got fired from my teaching job.

    Indeed, it is absurdly easy to get fired from a teaching job in the United States for opinions—or even on mere suspicion of opinions—of which a Leftist dean or department head disapproves.

    I know no particular reason most readers here should appreciate or especially care about the problem, for they have their own troubles; but I can confirm from personal experience that your report not only is believable but is probably understated.

    Whatever else might be true regarding the first millenium, Pontius Pilate at least is no fictional character. One can likely find him sitting behind the dean’s desk, collecting $200,000 a year, at the nearest state university.

  429. @Brás Cubas

    Your points are well taken. The calm picture you paint is, on its face, more believable than mine.

    However, there are several reasons in my experience why it does not work the way one would expect, at least in the United States.

    Other comments of mine have been too long, so let me just state that an intricate web of a thousand seldom articulated, barely articulable, unwritten rules exists to enforce ideological conformity within the institutions of which you speak. The rules are as hard to explain as the rules of Japanese bows and are more sinister. Transgression against any of the thousand rules can be fatal to a future professor’s career.

    From about the age of 22 to about the age of 36, the future professor is put through an academic gauntlet; and after about the age of 27, every opportunity is taken to observe the future professor’s ideological reliability.

    The details of how this is done are Byzantine. In my own experience, for example, the details have involved a divorced, embittered menopausal woman deployed by a dean (who thereby kept his own hands clean) into a low-visibility committee assignment in which the woman could frustrate every attempt by a young man’s colleagues and mentors to save the young man’s career.

    If you would like more details, you can ask but, at any rate, big corporations that do not want to limit their carbon emissions unfortunately have little to do with the matter in my experience.

    (Please note incidentally that I have expressed no opinion regarding climate change or global warming.)

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  430. Iris says:
    @Ivan

    Let us add this to the sterling record of the many ways the Muslims preserved learning during the “Dark Ages” in Europe.

    What a pathetic display of ignorance.
    The principal civilizational block bridging Ancient Greece and Byzantium on one hand to European Renaissance on the other was Islamic Al Andalus.

    Mathematics, medicine, philosophy, geography, botany, engineering, agriculture, almost all area of knowledge in Al Andalus witnessed a Golden Age starting from 822, and were transferred thanks to translation and a multicultural society, enabling the European Renaissance.

    To give but a couple of examples, Averroes was the heir thanks to whom Aristotle’s rational thinking was transmitted to Europe.; St Thomas Aquinas greatly based his work on Averroes’.

    The use of zero in mathematics, imposed by Al Khawarizmi, was taught to Gerbert d’Aurillac when studying at Cordoba, who then went on to become Pope Sylvester II and imposed its usage to all of Christendom.

    Al Andalus’ doctors invented surgery, ophthalmology and medicinal drugs. Their geographer Al Idrisi eastablished the most accurate map of the world at the time, and their astronomers the “Toledo Tables” later translated by Gerard de Cremone to be used throughout Europe.

    • Thanks: mark green
    • Replies: @ivan
  431. Norbertus says:
    @Kapyong

    Tradition is the Christian word for beliefs not supported by any actual evidence.

    No, Tradition is always founded on historical sources, whether they are oral or scriptural.
    Besides, I was answering to a protestantizing comment and therefore I used Tradition which is denied by protestants as you know.

    You can read about Peter going to Rome in Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Eusebius … On the journey of Paul to Rome there is of course also a large amount of sources. Are these writers all lying? If Paul and Peter stayed in Jerusalem or went to Byzantium and not Rome, where are all the sources of this?

  432. @V. K. Ovelund

    Well, what you say is possible. But who dictates that “ideology” you mention, and how does that affect the knowledge produced by the Universities, especially in the so-called hard sciences?

    (Please note incidentally that I have expressed no opinion regarding climate change or global warming.)

    Well, if your criticism regards the History department, or the Humanities in general, I agree that there is a lot less control that may be exerted over what is produced as ‘science’, and distortions may occur.

  433. @Brás Cubas

    Pardon. My phrasing was ambiguous.

    Well, if your criticism regards the History department, or the Humanities in general, I agree that there is a lot less control that may be exerted over what is produced as ‘science’, and distortions may occur.

    No, following your lead, I indeed was speaking of climate change and global warming—or, rather, about the academic politics of topics like climate change and global warming. My parenthetical note merely admitted that, because geology is not my field, I take no scientific position as to whether the climate is actually changing or the globe is actually warming.

    The geological profession’s public relations on the topic have been disastrous. Unless one happens to be a geologist/meteorologist oneself, hardly anyone knows what to believe.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  434. @Brás Cubas

    But who dictates that “ideology” you mention?

    I do not know.

  435. tiami says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Thanks for the post. I agree the only thing I’d like to add is that the Empire was really huge at the beginning whole Mediterranian and to Rhine and Danube and beyond. Nicomedia, Byzantum, Antioch, Sirmium, Mediolanum, Trier, Alexandria even London and Pariz were all capital cities. But not Rome in time of Diocletian and Constantine and his heirs. Morozov sasyRome was important pilgrimage place and possibly fancy city for elite members of society with famous baths and temples. He also claims Augustus is written off Constantine, Ceasar from his father Constantius I. Pompey from Diocletian. Which brings us to Heinsohn’s ”republican age” and Late Latene. That’s another thing about Heinsohn he doesn’t mention Morozov but he must be awere of his work. None of Morozov’s work has ever been published outside Russian language except one book in German 😉

    Right click and translate. http://vvu-library.ru/morozov/index.htm

  436. Virgil S says:
    @Nicucino

    Unfortunately the book by Du Nay (originally Dunay, a Hungarian name) is seriously flawed, not so much by what it covers but by what it omits. Du Nay tries to prove linguistically that the Romanians (i.e., the Vlachs) originated in a tiny region of modern Albania. He points to the words common to Albanian and Romanian as the evidence. But there is a much broader linguistic commonality between Albanian, Romanian and South Slavic, called the Balkan Sprachbund. The shared grammatical features suggest a pre Roman and pre Slavic substratum, that is, the Thracian language.

    He also attempts to make the case that the Slavic vocabulary in Romanian means that their ancestors were mountain shepherds who simply did not know these concepts but had to learn of them from the Slavs. Dunay neglects to mention that the fundamental agricultural terms in Romanian are Latin. Moreover he neglects bilingualism as the key mechanism of language replacement.

    • Agree: Seraphim
  437. Virgil S says:
    @Nicucino

    Unfortunately the book by Du Nay (originally Dunay, a Hungarian name) is seriously flawed, not so much by what it covers but by what it omits. Du Nay tries to prove linguistically that the Romanians (i.e., the Vlachs) originated in a tiny region of modern Albania. He points to the words common to Albanian and Romanian as the evidence. But there is a much broader linguistic commonality between Albanian, Romanian and Slavic, called the Balkan Sprachbund. The shared grammatical features suggest a pre Roman and pre Slavic substratum, that is, the Thracian language.

    He also attempts to make the case that the Slavic vocabulary in Romanian means that their ancestors were mountain shepherds who simply did not know these concepts but had to learn of them from the Slavs. Dunay neglects to mention that the fundamental agricultural terms in Romanian are Latin. Moreover it neglects bilingualism as the key mechanism of language replacement.

    • Replies: @Nicucino
    , @RT
  438. @V. K. Ovelund

    The don’t “worm” — the are selected, chosen for their aptitude for the role . The pay is 30 pieces of silver. And “incredible tenacity” in enforcing orthodoxy is a definitive function of “institutions.” It’s primary to the “job description.”

  439. Seraphim says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Once again, Goths and Getae are not the same, but in the apologetic history of Jordanes. The only question is whether Jordanes was a simpleton who didn’t really understood what he was reading (he asserts that he had read the history of the Goths by Cassiodorus in just three days!) or he deliberately ‘falsified’ their history for propagandistic reasons. The fact, generally overlooked, that he was producing in haste (interrupting his writing of a Roman History) his ‘Getica’ at the peak of the wars of Justinian with the Osthrogoths for the recuperation of Italy, shed more light on the real intention of this ‘apologia pro domo sua’. If other writers could have ‘mistaken’ Goths with Getae (e.g. Procopius: “the Goths, Vandals, Visigoths, and Gepaedes…. in ancient times were named Sauromatae and Melanchlaeni; and there were some too who called these nations Getic”) it is in very general terms. Only Jordanes positively asserts this identity and falsely ascribes the feats of the real Getae to the Goths. It is not unlikely that the ‘some’ of Procopius was Cassiodorus (who wrote his Historia Gothorum for the Ostrogoth kings of Italy, Theoderic and Athalaric) and presumably the oral ‘invented traditions’ by the Goths themselves.

  440. ivan says:
    @Iris

    Thanks for regurgitating the bullshit about the never before seen Al-Andalus. Look if the Muslims are that good, why aren’t they achieving similar heights today. Almost all the totally screwed up countries are either Islamic or have an insurgent Islamic element that wants to drag the rest of us down to its level. And don’t patronise me with your “memory palaces” as Fouad Ajami so aptly described the Arab and Muslim tendency to glorify the make believe past.

  441. ivan says:
    @ivan

    The loss of the Mediterranean, the “Mare Nostrum” was devastating to the peoples of the littoral. A sea that was the basis for the sustenance of their culture and commerce was denied them for centuries until the Reconquista . It is no coincidence that when the European fightback began it was through the Iberian Peninsula. Thank God for the glorious Isabella and her descendants.

    • Agree: Seraphim
  442. Seraphim says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    It is not insignificant that N.A. Morozov was a dyed in the wool revolutionary. His works about Christianity have been deemed too revolutionary even for the Bolsheviks, but he obtained the backing of Lenin himself. Obviously his science-fiction theories were deemed useful in the struggle of the ‘Bezbozhniki’ against the Church and for the introduction of a ‘revolutionary calendar’, surely with the prospect of creating the ‘new man’ of the fully atheist communist society, without history, religion, family.

    • Replies: @tiami
  443. The First Millennium Revisionist: “If Julius Caesar is a fiction, then so is much of Imperial Rome.”

    As to the historicity of Caesar, his contemporary Catullus addresses him in Carmina 93.

    Nil nimium studeo, Caesar, tibi uelle placere,
    Nec scire utrum sis albus an ater homo.

    This is difficult to explain unless you argue that the poems of Catullus are also forgeries. But the supposition is absurd, because anyone with that much ability could have been justly famous as a poet under his own name.

    Also, if you are saying that a money-hungry forger wrote them just to satisfy his greed, it seems to me implausible that the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius are forgeries, just because a worldly man interested only in money would be incapable of the degree of self insight and asceticism they show. If they are forgeries, they’re a masterpiece. Marcus’ existence is also attested by Ammianus Marcellinus. Are his writings still another forgery?

    • Replies: @Tom67
    , @Adûnâi
  444. Iris says:
    @ivan

    Thanks for regurgitating the bullshit about the never before seen Al-Andalus

    It’s “never seen ” only by retarded country bumpkins like yourself, and by hateful Zionists, whichever one you are.

    The evidence of Al Andalus civilizational achievements are still standing to the day, in the form of extraordinary constructions and complex artefacts kept in museums. These attract millions of cultural tourists every year to the South of Spain, whose people are genuinely proud of this heritage. You are pathetic.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Ivan
    , @Ivan
  445. tiami says:
    @Seraphim

    Let’s condemn a man for being born in unappropriate times. Or expressing wrong ideas. Eventhough we live in times full of tolerance at the height of honest scientific thought and guided by divine mercy of course people like Morozov, Newton, Illig or Heinsohn are guilty of creating fertile grounds for ”the new man” we all fear. Questioning bases of our blessed civilisation is indeed an act of worst type of revolutionists. So I’m sure Morozov’s 25 years in jail was a fair punishment and divine intervention.

  446. tiami says:
    @Nicucino

    How do you dig into a dead language of whom only one inscription exists? Answer: you connect it to another language which was written 100 years ago. On territory of ancient Illyricum only two languages are attested until 15-16th century. Latin and Slavic. And S. Slavic was synonym for Illyirian until 19th century when this fact started to change for geopolitical reasons.

    • Agree: Seraphim
  447. @V. K. Ovelund

    I find it interesting to read testimonies such as yours. And it’s refreshing that you don’t claim knowledge you don’t have (as you do in your other reply).

    I do not belong to Academia, and so have no details of its flaws, but overall I think it is still producing valuable knowledge. As for climate change, I do what as a layman I think is most rational: accept the hegemonic opinion, and try to notice how empirical data behaves. As for policies, I think who best summarized the situation is French philosopher Alain de Benoist: regardless of all or part of the theory of global warming being possibly incorrect, there are still solid reasons for fearing the exhaustion of the planet’s natural resources, and thus for the global economy and the global population to stop growing.

    • Thanks: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Sparkon
  448. tiami says:

    For example let’s compare by far the oldest surviving Indoeuropean language – Vedic Sanskrit (as such it should be regarded as Proto IE not some fictional mambo jumbo) to modern South Slavic. Why does modern science keeps ignoring such obvious similarities?

  449. @ivan

    Genghis Khan is the primary reason Islam has been in the doldrums for the past 800 years. He laid waste to Central Asia and Persia/Mesopotamia to an extent that Europeans don’t really understand. Then the Turkish tribes came after him and finished the job. Ottoman rule was despotic and reliant on local warlords and ethnic segregation. Not a conducive society for intellectual exploration.

    • Replies: @Ivan
  450. Bleuazur says:
    @gT

    “I read somewhere that the Dead Sea Scrolls held by the Israel Museum in Jerusalem never leave Israel, so no outsider has verified their authenticity.

    Probably if they do leave the museum the Mossad goons keep a close watch to prevent anyone from obtaining a sample for analysis.”

    Yeah, I suspected indeed something like that.

    • Agree: tiami
  451. Bleuazur says:
    @antibeast

    I don’t agree at all with you about “Germanic barbarians without their own history write “Fake History”.

    This version of the cultures North from Rome being “barbarians” have long ago been debunked. Roman (fake?) writings spread this myth. Celts for instance created what is today wrongly attributed to Romans, like for instance the so-named “Roman roads” in Europe. Their civilization was highly advanced.

    And this is also relevant to even more ancient times : Jürgen Spanuth, a german searcher proved the old Germans were highly evolved. More than 3000 years ago, they were for instance the best seafarers and are at the origins of iron working. They also created the first alphabet, which later evolved to the Greek one. One of their main gods was Apollo…

    They were set up on islands of the North Sea (near Helgoland), which make up the actual Atlantis described by Platon (who was right, he just misdated the Atlantis story). In the 13th century BC, there was a (maybe) worldwide cataclysm, and those Germans lost their isles, and so went through almost whole Europe, in a South-Eastern direction. After having been beaten by the Athenians, they settled in the Middle-East where they were called the Philistines. Those brought their highly evolved civilization to the primitive tribes living there, especially the Israelites (which owe much to them – for instance, Solomon’s temple architect was a Philistine – thus a German!). The Philistines tried also to conquer Egypt, but failed. This is proven by ancient paintings in Egyptian temples which clearly show Northern warriors captured by the Egyptians (as well as their ships, that much resemble Viking ones).
    Part of the Philistines became the Phoenicians. Later on most of them went back to Greece and this time conquered it (they were called the “Heraklids”). They brought their culture to Greece, and are at the origins of the Hellenistic Greece.

    The author shows overwhelming evidence to support his thesis, especially archeological one. And seventy years ago, the remains of the principal isle of Atlantis were still visible in the North Sea, and completely matched Plato’s description (it is very precise and detailed). By the way, Helgoland is the only remaining part of Atlantis.

    My personal opinion after reading Spanuth’s books (Das enträtselte Atlantis, Die Philister, Die Rückkehr der Herakliden ; in English there’s also Atlantis – the mistery unraveled), is that old Germans are for sure at the origins of our Western culture.
    I know this won’t please everyone, so I can only encourage the reading of his books, available here (afaik the paper version isn’t available anymore) : https://b-ok.cc/s/spanuth

    And please, stop applying ideology to history. Even if a (in my opinion proven) theory doesn’t seem “politically correct” and/or doesnt fit your ideas,the truth is still the truth.

    • LOL: FB, Hiram of Tyre
  452. @Bleuazur

    I don’t know if the Dead sea scrolls kept in Israel are forgeries. Could very well be. But allready a long time ago, I read Norman Golb’s Who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls and became convinced that, at least, the Essenian hypothesis which was from the very start imposed by the Catholic and Israeli scholars was completly unsubstantiated.

    • Thanks: Iris
    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  453. Ivan says:
    @Iris

    Even in your terms what is so great about the architecture of Andalus? Spanning roofs? But the Romans already had that centuries before see the Lateran Cathedral. Compare Al Hambra and what not to say the Cologne Cathedral. No fight at all.

  454. Ivan says:
    @Iris

    Even in your terms what is so great about the architecture of Andalus? Spanning roofs? But the Romans already had that centuries before see the Lateran Cathedral. Compare Al Hambra and what not to say the Cologne Cathedral. No fight at all.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
    , @Seraphim
  455. Ivan says:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    The Muslims closed off the intellectual tradition when they persecuted all who question their religious beliefs . Playing the devil’s advocate was a more hazardous occupation for Muslims than followers of other religions since it is the flimsiest of religions unable to rely on anything but persecution to support itself intellectually. I am aware that this retort could be applied to other religions. But those religions are not based to the same degree on lies as the Islamic religion is. It is a religion for primitive peoples and there they remain if they are satisfied with it.

    Genghis Khan’s marauding of course killed off millions. But he did not change the nature of Islam itself. Some of his grandsons became Muslim. Don’t seem to have changed anything one way or another.

    • Agree: Seraphim
  456. @Bleuazur

    They also created the first alphabet, which later evolved to the Greek one.

    Wrong. The first script originated in the original Vinca civilisation in the Balkans in the 6th to 5th millennia BC, from which other alphabets evolved.

    The Danube Script: Neo-Eneolithic Writing in Southeastern Europe
    MUSEUM OF HISTORY, CASA ALTEMBERGER, BRUKENTHAL NATIONAL MUSEUM, SIBU, ROMANIA, May 18-20, 2008.

    https://www.archaeomythology.org/archaeomythological-events/romania-2008/

    https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f1094fb9c8145c3369b9650da665749d

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
  457. Nicucino says:
    @Virgil S

    “The shared grammatical features suggest a pre Roman and pre Slavic substratum, that is, the Thracian language.”

    Yes indeed, so it seems. Thank you.

  458. Sparkon says:
    @Brás Cubas

    As for policies, I think who best summarized the situation is French philosopher Alain de Benoist: regardless of all or part of the theory of global warming being possibly incorrect, there are still solid reasons for fearing the exhaustion of the planet’s natural resources, and thus for the global economy and the global population to stop growing.

    Known coal reserves in the United States amount to almost 250 billion metric tons, and would last about 300 years at current rates of usage, according to most estimates. Additionally, it seems likely that there are unknown coal reserves that have not been discovered, both in the United States and elsewhere around the world.

    The long and short of it is there is little danger of running out of coal for at least several hundred years, and so I must ask why you would refer to a philosopher about a question of geology?

    Furthermore, one should always distinguish between natural climate change, which has been established beyond any reasonable doubt by both history and geology, and so-called anthropogenic, or man-man climate change, which has not been proven, and remains a theory.

    Civilizations tend to do well when the climate is good, and they tend to crash when the climate goes bad, as it did during the Dark Ages Cold Period, which the most recent research attributes to 6th century volcanic eruptions in Iceland and perhaps elsewhere.

    Please note that, until recently, the Dark Ages were blamed on all sorts of things, like cultural deterioration, barbarians, and blah blah blah, but not climate change, so I am following First Millennium Revisionist’s series with keen interest.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  459. Bleuazur says:
    @Commentator Mike

    It was about the first alphabet, not the first script.

    And it is most likely this Vinca stuff wasn’t an alphabet at all, maybe not even a script.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-currently-known-about-the-T%C4%83rt%C4%83ria-tablets-and-the-Vin%C4%8Da-symbols
    https://www.quora.com/If-Vinca-script-isnt-writing-what-are-the-symbols-thought-to-represent

    As for the Philistine alphabet (also named Phoenician alphabet), its roots go back to the old rune script of the Northern Europeans.

    • Replies: @FB
  460. @Nick Kollerstrom

    Do we have any such astrological charts from AD 300 to AD 1000 because that’s what he is precisely trying to do relying on Gunnar Heinsohn who was influenced by Immanuel Velikovsky. That would be greatly helpful in addressing these ‘missing centuries.’

  461. antibeast says:
    @Bleuazur

    This version of the cultures North from Rome being “barbarians” have long ago been debunked. Roman (fake?) writings spread this myth.

    My personal opinion after reading Spanuth’s books (Das enträtselte Atlantis, Die Philister, Die Rückkehr der Herakliden; in English there’s also Atlantis – the mystery unraveled), is that old Germans are for sure at the origins of our Western culture.

    Romans: “You Germanics are barbarians!”
    Germanics: “No! We wuz kangz!”

    • LOL: Bleuazur
  462. Bleuazur says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    Thanks FMR!

    What is weird is that the Dead Sea scrolls and the Nag Hammadi codexes were (iirc) discovered the same year, and the locations were quite close to one another. Is that just sheer coincidence ?

    I find these codexes way more interesting than the scrolls. The searcher John Lash Lamb in Not in his image (one of the hardest readings I ever had, but really edifying) wrote that contrary to the official interpretations, they were not written by christians, but by highly educated pagans. The Gnostics who wrote them were conversely violently opposed to christianity, which they considered to be the biggest threat on humanity.

    The author pointed out that no one ever made a cross-match between the rolls and the codexes while they’re from the same region. And there are many elements that show that the ideology the Gnostics were fighting against was that of the people (Essenians maybe… or not) who wrote the Dead Sea scrolls.

    PS : thank you for your excellent article! I know it’s maybe indiscrete, but would you happen to be French? I ask you that because I myself am.

  463. FB says: • Website
    @Bleuazur

    As for the Philistine alphabet (also named Phoenician alphabet), its roots go back to the old rune script of the Northern Europeans.

    Complete bullshit…you’re obviously completely uneducated…

    • Agree: vot tak
    • LOL: Bleuazur
    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
  464. @Sparkon

    I suppose every denier of a hegemonic theory has a personal reason for being so. Likewise for every affirmer. My reason is that I value quality of life and, in the absence of absolute proof of something, one must go for the most cautious alternative. I don’t know what your reasons are, but in 100% of the other examples I know of deniers, they have obvious connections with big corporations and their interests.

    Known coal reserves (…)

    Honestly, do you really think I am talking of coal reserves when I mention the planet’s resources? As I see it, if coal reserves ended today, it would be a boon for the human species. I am talking of WATER, of AIR, and other things that are indispensable for human life.

  465. Mike P says:

    I don’t know what your reasons are, but in 100% of the other examples I know of deniers, they have obvious connections with big corporations and their interests.

    You are projecting. The big corporations are on your side of the argument.

    [MORE]

    As for your argument about the resources – it may have escaped your notice, but water and air are actually not limited, but constantly renewed. Plants consume CO2 and produce O2, whereas we do the opposite. Likewise, the sun evaporates ocean water, which then rains down to replenish the freshwater sources. In contrast, coal is a limited resource.

    Whatever your motives maybe, what you lack is knowledge and general reasoning skills. You have nothing to contribute to questions that require at least a modicum of scientific thought. Better just stick to professing outrage and calling people names.

  466. @Ivan

    Agreed, and one does not have to go from Spain to Germany to prove it.

    The Alhambra itself contains a luminous refutation of all that endless chatter about Islamic cultural superiority:

    • Thanks: ivan
    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  467. RT says:
    @Virgil S

    In the disput what language /languages were spoken in the lands of today Romania in medieval times, it seems no one sees the obvious. Take a look at the maps from 7-14 century and you will see whose states were there – Bulgarian Empire to the East, Hungarian Kingdom to the West with common border between them. There was no “Slavic language”, there were Bulgarian language , which is Slavic, of cource, and Hungarian language spoken there.
    Slavic might have evolved to a great degree from Thracian.
    The term “Vlach”/”Vlasi” became a name for all Roman or Romanized people, speaking some version of Latin in the area after Vlacherna/Blacherna – the great palace of Eastern Roman Emperors built in 500 AD. They still exist in every country there.

    • Replies: @Virgil S
    , @Virgil S
  468. Tom67 says:
    @Dr. Robert Morgan

    I believe you waste your time arguing with the authour. He really doesn´t have the first clue as he evidently either doesn´t know Latin or else knows it (and the Romanic languages) so superficially that he comes to conclusions that are totally hare brained. But as he doesn´t know how to explain it to him? He would need to study a few years of Latin to appreciate Catullus. My theory regarding the authour is that he came up with some theory and then looked for facts supporting it. Just like the myriads of people looking for Atlantis who become convinced of some or another theory and then bore the shit out of you. Alas a sign of modern times.

    • LOL: tiami
  469. @Bleuazur

    The searcher John Lash Lamb in Not in his image wrote that contrary to the official interpretations, Nag Hammadi codexes were not written by christians, but by highly educated pagans.

    That sounds extremely interesting to me, so I’ve just ordered the book. It has been my growing suspicion that, up to the Middle Ages, the gnostics that the Church were fighting (often under the generic name of Manicheans) were not Christians. We know they rejected the OT, but even their “NT” might have not been about a Jewish Messiah at all. For some reason (perhaps to disguise its own pagan roots), the Church has been trying to disguise as a fight against heresy what was a fight against pre-christian paganism. In Western Europe, paganism was not vanquished before the Gregorian Reform, and the cult of Mary that developed then is clearly derived from the cult of Isis. As for the East, Constantinople, the origin of Christianity there is harder to find, but it is inconceivable to me that Hagia Sophia was founded as a Christian basilica. The cult of Sophia is evidently what pagan “philosophers”, not Christian priests, were interested in. I’ll get into this in the next article.
    Et oui, je suis un peu français!

    • Replies: @Bleuazur
    , @Seraphim
  470. @First Millennium Revisionist

    Wow where do I even begin I thought that I was getting into an argument about medieval forgers forging Hellenistic classics which were in great demand during the Renaissance (I will get back to that later since the bait wasn’t given by accident and I think it does pertain to your larger argument).

    At the outset I’ve never read anything so radical in the history of history, I’ve heard of 6 million missing Jews not the missing 7 centuries or millenia. Gunnar Heinsohn’s thesis defies belief but it is to my amateur eyes strongly argued. He sets great store in Roman architecture not changing for 700 years across Europe, why should that be so great a problem, Rome were such great builders that their style got copied across the world, check out capitol hill, he goes on to say that some structures or many structures stood for 8-10 centuries, again why is that a problem Roman structures are still standing today, he says that there was total architectural stagnation for 7 centuries again I don’t see why that should be a problem, American inspired skyscrapers are likely to last for centuries if not more. About the stratigraphical problem as to why no structures appear below the ones built, I cannot answer but he says that there were something like 35,000 sites where you’d expect to find structures below corresponding to various parts of the problematical period and and yet he couldn’t find one, well he surely couldn’t have pored through all the records. Same goes with the toilets and residential quarters apparently not built in Rome for 7 centuries all very intriguing and mysterious.

    Realizing that he has an overwhelming problem in accounting for the people/dynasties important personalities etc etc who cannot just be wished away from the missing centuries he comes up with a few intriguing parrallelisms 3 centures apart which he reduces to a single event(tactic of time shortening) like Emperor Domitian and Emperor Gratian, the Jewish war in the 1st Century and the one in the 4th century suggesting that the events are the same probably two historians narrating the same event not communicating with each other and getting the dates messed up, well now the problem starts to heat up we are dealing with narrative history not Stratigraphy, architecture or artifacts. And now I would like to ask you a question, if you wipe out the 7 centuries by saying that it was a gross chronological error what about the people in it, Were the 2 nd Century Emperors Hadrian and Trajan contemporaries of Mohammed or does Mohammed get pushed 7 centuries ahead, Are Charlemagne, Hadrian, Trajan,Mohammed and the Heraclian dynasty all roughly contemporaneous, how many centuries seperate Emperor Constantine from Justinian since they are in that Bermuda Triangle of History should we add them to the previous illustrious list of contemporaries. Gunnar’s exercise of treating analogous historical events as the same one of which he has given us a few intriguing examples for all its ingenuity will get entangled in such monstrous complications that there will be no escape. What about the dates after the missing 7 centuries did historians by magic discover the correct chronology? When did Columbus sail to America, Could you please post a timeline of events for us from AD 1 to AD 1500 to judge the soundness of the new Chronology of History you’re proposing. Does this only apply to Europe, I would think not, the world still was connected barely by today’s standards but it was, there has to have been events, dynasties and personalities contemporaneous to events, dynasties and personalities in civilizations like India and China, can we expect the Chinese to shave off 7 centuries of their history and make the Later Han Dynasty contemporary to the Tang dynasty? Isn’t this a serious problem?

    You might say that this particular limited temporal annihilation is local but not Mr. Gunnar, he it seems has an addiction to this kind of time reduction. From his Wiki page;

    According to Heinsohn, bible synchronisms led to pharaos Menes and Ramesses II being dated to the 4th millennium and the 14th century, respectively. As a result, Heinsohn concluded that they created a “phantom” history of two thousand years. In contrast, Heinsohn interpreted stratigraphic evidence to suggest that Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations arose around 1,200 BCE, not 3,200 BCE, as the textbooks say.

    The Palermo stone tells us that he is wrong.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palermo_Stone

    Here’s a rebuttal to him claiming that Hammurabi and Darius are the same person a favourite tactic of his to shorten history.

    https://www.maverickscience.com/wp-content/uploads/Gunnar-Heinsohn-criticism.pdf

    Heinsohn’s is not an abstruse argument about the succession of ancient dynasties. If
    Heinsohn is right, the entire history of the development of civilization will have to be
    written anew. The validity of his scheme will emerge in short order, since the theory is
    highly falsifiable: at every stage the double existences of historical figures and events
    must match, allowing only for the vicissitudes of historical preservation. Once the
    overall historical scheme has been declared, not only are the kingdoms and dynasties
    identified with their historical doubles, but individual rulers within each dynasty, and the
    peculiar events of their reigns as well. A single fact, if sufficiently substantiated, could
    ruin the entire structure. An example may usefully illustrate this point. If the Sumerians
    are indeed the Chaldeans, it follows that Shulgi, the greatest king of the so-called “neo-
    Sumerian” period is the same as Nebuchadnezzar, the greatest king of the “neo-
    Babylonian” period. There is nothing arbitrary about this identification; it is a logical
    deduction from the postulated premises. If any discrepancy between the two men, such
    as lifespan, length of reign or ancestry is found and sufficiently established, the scheme
    proffered by Heinsohn would be disproved. On the other hand, with falsifiability being
    such an intrinsic feature of this revision of history, the continuing absence of disproof
    (the theory has been circulated among laymen and scholars alike for five years or more),
    increases its plausibility.”1

    This quote was just to show the other posters what is at stake and is really going on and according to the article he failed to show that Darius and Hammurabi are the same person on both philological and stratigraphical grounds.

    Returning to the European sphere surely the oldest organization in the world the Vatican must have lots of correspondence with illustrious figures during those missing centuries surely that correspondence would prove a thorn in his duplication of historical figures … I now come to why you started this series of essays with one about renaissance forgers forging Classical History because finally you and I mean Gunnar’s team will have to resort to the excuse of wide spread forgery amongst historians to account for a lot of illustrious personages who can’t be reduced by the duplication method to non existence in order to vanish 7 centuries.

    The real scandal here is the conspiracy of academic silence surrounding Gunnar, in vain did I search for it – professional academia giving a beatdown to Gunnar it doesn’t exist, but why, the man is a living Wikipedia a first rate original mind with such a radical hypothesis marshalled by an encyclopedia of interesting observations, why the total silence for we are not dealing with politically charged history like the Holocaust. This’s a first rate mind threatening to rubbish the entire project (History) and surely he deserves to be treated better than a street corner lunatic but the academia figured out that by arguing with him he will be exposed to the world and so chose to remain silent.

    My last two replies to you took hours and hours to compose because everything in this is new to me accept the name Tacitus. My mind’s at sea so forgive me for any incoherence it’s my attempt to rescue ‘Imperial & late Antiquity ‘ from Gunnar’s millenium swallowing mania. I still can’t get over why no professional mainstream archaeologist hasn’t disagreed with Gunnar’s radical and devastating intepretation of the stratigraphic record.

  471. @Old Palo Altan

    The Courtyard of Charles V in the Alhambra.

    • Replies: @Iris
  472. @Grahamsno(G64)

    I really don’t have the professional expertise to argue with you and Gunnar but since History is the easiest accessible professional field of enquiry I just stated commonsense objections, trying to get into a professional argument with you chronological revisionists would be like me trying to convince Sir Isaac Newton that he was very wrong about Alchemy.

  473. Iris says:
    @Old Palo Altan

    Your cluelessness is so comical that it has to be deliberate.

    Likely, your use of a geographical moniker is meant at making Americans look like retarded hillbillies; you are Israeli.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  474. Iris says:
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    why the total silence for we are not dealing with politically charged history like the Holocaust.

    I think we are. Contemporary Western imperialism founded its legitimacy on an alleged exceptionalism derived, among other things, from the West being the sole heir to the “greatest” Roman Empire.

    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
    , @dfordoom
  475. al007 says:
    @trelane

    This is the real “We Wuz Kangz” ……European style. Any AfroCentric worth his salt could tell u the same.

    Large amounts of “European” history is made up, lies, obsfuscations etc.

    The Renaissance is called that for a reason: Rebirth: i.e. a NEW beginning …. made up and created by the elites to attempt to create social cohesion and to give them selves a sense on legitimacy and a sense of self.

    All those hard marble statues in museums c…all fakes…read the labels: “Roman copy of Greek original”….
    where then are the originals ?? the ancients of the region did not work such hard marble…they used bronze and softer stone.

    The why of it all ? Western Europeans…descendants of barbarians (“white”) woke up and realized that they were the last of the races/peoples to civilization and had no ancient history which to claim. Solution: create one.
    forged literature, art, architecture, fake histories and nebulous connections to ancient civilizations.

  476. @Iris

    If you mean by my “cluelessness” my inability to successfully transfer a photo from one site to another, then I ruefully plead guilty. Sometimes I manage it and sometimes I don’t, and I’ve precisely no clue as to why this is. But I’ll learn (it is but a question of technique) as a favour to you: these continual fits of the vapours can’t be good for your health.

    If, on the other hand, you are implying the superiority of Islamic barbarism to the cool, measured, soul-satisfying beauty of the first great work of the Italian renaissance on Spanish soil, then it is you who lack a clue as to which principles bring beauty into being and which do not.

    But such clues, if indeed lacking, one cannot learn: they are inborn, and a gift from the gods.

  477. Robjil says:

    There was a huge empire from England down to Med sea, then taking in the whole Med sea region. There are numerous large ruins, whatever name one wants to call the empire. There was one. There too evidence to be otherwise. Here is a list of some big ruins scattered around this gigantic empire.

    https://www.loveexploring.com/gallerylist/70876/roman-ruins-roman-sites-around-world

    [MORE]

    Aphrodisias, Turkey
    Butrint, Albania
    Walls of Lugo, Spain
    Jerash, Jordan
    Caesarea, Israel
    Hadrian’s Wall, England
    Paphos, Cyprus
    Timgad, Algeria
    Imperial Baths of Trier, Germany
    Cartagena, Spain
    Leptis Magna, Libya
    Dougga, Tunisia
    Perge, Turkey
    Empúries, Spain
    Fishbourne Roman Palace, UK
    Bet She’an National Park, Israel
    Capua Amphitheatre, Italy
    Volubilis, Morocco
    Olympos, Turkey
    Tipaza, Algeria
    Roman Theatre of Orange, France
    Herculaneum, Italy
    Baelo Claudia, Spain
    Temple of Hadrian, Ephesus, Turkey
    Pula, Croatia
    Hierapolis, Turkey
    Heraclea Lyncestis, Macedonia
    Porta Nigra, Germany
    Kourion, Cyprus
    Vindolanda, England
    Baalbek, Lebanon
    Temple of Hercules, Jordan
    Ostia Antica, Italy
    Djémila, Algeria
    Sabratha, Libya
    Amphitheatre of El Jem, Tunisia
    Diocletian’s Palace, Split, Croatia
    Roman Temple of Évora, Portugal
    Caerleon Roman Fortress, Wales
    Roman Theatre of Mérida, Spain
    Odeon of Herodes Atticus, Athens, Greece
    Plovdiv, Bulgaria
    Nîmes Arena, France
    Magdala, Israel
    Bath, England

    • Thanks: ivan
  478. @Iris

    Iris,

    Sorry you don’t have a clue about the absolute radical revision of history he’s proposing a revision so radical that if an entire millennium can be shrunk into nothingness then History is bullshit, and nobody else has got a clue to the next articles he will post other than me, if 7 centuries of chronology can be shrunk into nothingness than nothing else matters, we on this site are history buffs and I’m shocked that nobody understood this attempt at this unbelievable attempt to vanish 7 centuries away,.

    I’m the only one carrying the flag against such a radical chronological revisionism against history, which makes me a conservative, shame on the others on this site who have not understood this. You can’t vanish 7 centuries of European history away without turning the whole historical narrative into bullshit.

    • Agree: ivan
    • Replies: @Iris
    , @dfordoom
  479. @FB

    I wish I had your gift for not tolerating such retards

  480. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Iris

    why the total silence for we are not dealing with politically charged history like the Holocaust.

    I think we are. Contemporary Western imperialism founded its legitimacy on an alleged exceptionalism derived, among other things, from the West being the sole heir to the “greatest” Roman Empire.

    All history is politically charged.

    • Replies: @Robjil
  481. Virgil S says:
    @RT

    I don’t think so. Latin was the language of the administration and the military for seven centuries in the Balkans.

    Vlach is the Slavic form of the Germanic Walhaz by which ancient Germanics designated first the Romanized Celts and later all Romance people from Britain to the Balkans. Germanic cognates of Vlach are Welsh, Welschen, Wal, Val.

    • LOL: FB
  482. Virgil S says:
    @RT

    I don’t think so. Latin was the language of the administration and the military for seven centuries in the Balkans — from the first century BC to the seventh AD. Plus during these centuries there was significant colonization of Latin speakers in the Balkans. Its was only in the seventh century that the Eastern Roman Empire, now known as Byzantine, switched to Greek for the military and the administration.

    Vlach is the Slavic form of the Germanic Walhaz by which ancient Germanics designated first the Romanized Celts and later all Romance people throughout the Roman Empire from Britain to the Balkans. Germanic cognates of Vlach are Welsh, Welschen, Wal, Val. The Slavs borrowed this term from the Goths sometime in the 4th-6th centuries.

    • Replies: @RT
  483. @Grahamsno(G64)

    In the early 20th century, the Russian polymath Morozov discovered a horoscope in the Book of Revelations. His calculations, done by hand, showed no possible dates in the Christian era prior to 395 AD. A date in the late 600’s AD was a possibility, as well as a date in the late 1200’s AD and 1486 AD. Morozov never seriously considered the later two dates, but others have.

    Hellenistic-Egyptian horoscopes that historians tried to assign to dates earlier than 300 AD never yielded ideal, precise solutions within the time period of roughly 300 BC and 300 AD, despite the fact that some of the horoscopes were easy to read. Investigators had to be satisfied with “best fit” solutions that always left something to be desired.

    Morozov was the first to look for solutions later than 300 AD. However, when he started to intervene, historians lost interest in inviting mathematicians and physicists to date ancient horoscopes. Not finding precise dates within the time periods they were interested in, they seem to have dismissed the horoscopes as decorative depictions of what real horoscopes would look like. They did not want to think outside the box.

    • Replies: @ivan
  484. @Grahamsno(G64)

    In the early 20th century, the Russian polymath Morozov discovered a horoscope embedded in the text of the Book of Revelations. His calculations, done by hand, showed no possible dates in the Christian era prior to 395 AD. A date in the late 600’s AD was a possibility, as well as a date in the late 1200’s AD and 1486 AD. Morozov never seriously considered the later two dates, but others have.

    Hellenistic-Egyptian horoscopes that historians tried to assign to dates earlier than 300 AD never yielded ideal, precise solutions within the time period of roughly 300 BC and 300 AD, despite the fact that some of the horoscopes were easy to read. Investigators had to be satisfied with “best fit” solutions that always left something to be desired.

    Morozov was the first to look for solutions later than 300 AD. However, when he started to intervene, historians lost interest in inviting mathematicians and physicists to date ancient horoscopes. Not finding precise dates within the time periods they were interested in, they seem to have dismissed the horoscopes as decorative depictions of what real horoscopes would look like. They did not want to think outside the box.

    • Thanks: tiami
    • Replies: @Grahamsno(G64)
  485. Robjil says:
    @dfordoom

    The west died on 12.23.1913. Before that there was a Belle Epoque. People were allowed to speak freely on all things in that Epoque. This Unz site is bit like the Belle Epoque again. This Roman stuff is not the hot potatoe of our Epoque, the big 6 is the biggest one of all. One can’t go to jail for questioning the Roman Empire. In our time, Galileos who question the big 6 go to jail, are job less or ostracized. There is no western imperialism in our age. It is Zion imperialism which we are dealing with – 6 companies own western MSM and they are owned by Zionist or Judaic Imperialists. This MSM runs the west. The lastest Zion Zombie show is the BLM. The next show will be what? Who knows but our MSM masters.

    https://www.thoughtco.com/the-belle-epoque-beautiful-age-1221300

    Belle Époque literally means “Beautiful Age” and is a name given in France to the period from roughly the end of the Franco-Prussian War (1871) to the start of World War I (1914). This is picked out because the standards of living and security for the upper and middle classes increased, leading to it retrospectively being labeled as a golden age by them compared to the humiliations that came before, and the devastation of the end which completely changes Europe’s mindset. The lower classes did not benefit in the same way, or to anywhere near the same extent. The Age equates loosely to the “Gilded Age” of the US and can be used in reference to other western and central European countries for the same period and reasons (e.g. Germany).

  486. Iris says:
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    History is bullshit

    As it happens, I became convinced of that a long time ago after reading alternative thesis on the origins of Ancient Egypt. Nothing would surprise me, and certainly not to learn that the civilisational heart of Europe was beating in Byzantium instead of Rome, if this where this series of articles is heading.

    I don’t see the point in “bearing the flag” of Western civilisation by ignoring uncomfortable facts: collective delusion is a sure mark of civilisational decadence. I am very much looking forward to read Parts 2&3.

  487. FB says: • Website

    I’ve said here a number of times already that ‘history’ is a very weak science, especially as we go farther back in time…

    We have in the last few decades seen strong sciences like archaeology and genetics overturn already all kinds of bullshit that you would have learned in university just 100 years ago…

    If you go back 200 years, the crap that was taught is now pretty much toast…

    The simple fact is that our civilization is pretty young…writing did not exist in most of Europe until about 1,000 years ago…and even then those writings are not very reliable or helpful…

    It was about a thousand years ago that the Church started getting powerful and we started seeing more written documents appearing…

    At the same time the Church split into its eastern and western halves…naturally the western Roman church would seek to invent a historical narrative that said the east, Byzantine, sprang from it…but is this really true…?

    Or is the inverse true…did Rome really spring from Byzantium…?

    The author notes a remarkable fact…the Byzantine civilization owed nothing to Rome…the Byzantines considered themselves Romans, true, but was this their own mythology…and hearkening to a mythical place…?

    Constantinople fell in 1453…by this time the west was in the Renaissance and we see the beginnings of this ‘humanism’…which would become a kind of theology known now as ‘the humanities’…

    Just like Adam and Eve cannot be taken literally, neither can the teachings of these so called humanities…science has definitively debunked the former, and the latter is only a matter of time…

    I will note that a great many commenters here are just completely uneducated…practically no one here has bothered to educate themselves on very basic matters of European heritage that are now firmly established by science…such as where did our language come from and when…?

    An incredible amount of ignorance here, even for this wacky website…

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Grahamsno(G64)
  488. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    I’m the only one carrying the flag against such a radical chronological revisionism against history, which makes me a conservative, shame on the others on this site who have not understood this. You can’t vanish 7 centuries of European history away without turning the whole historical narrative into bullshit.

    The original article is clearly lunatic nonsense. It is disturbing to see so many people on this site who will swallow any crackpot theory.

    But you’re certainly not the only one appalled by such silly radical chronological revisionism. I suspect that a lot of people just thought the article was too crazy to bother replying to. Arguing with a crank is like arguing with a schizophrenic. As the saying goes, never wrestle with a pig. You just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  489. Seraphim says:
    @Ivan

    What about the Romanesque architecture and its clear Roman-Byzantine inspiration? See the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna, the Palatine Chapel in Aachen, the Baptistery of Aix-en-Provence, the Abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés in Paris, the ‘Visigothic’ architecture in Spain (the famed Mosque of Cordoba was built on the place of the Visigothic Church of San Vincent, like the Mosque of Damascus on the Basilica of John the Baptist). Was not the dome, so ‘characteristic’ for Islamic architecture, a Hellenistico-Roman ‘invention’ (the Pantheon in Rome, Nero’s Domus Aurea, Imperial halls, not to say anything of Hagia Sophia) copied (rather appropriated) by the ‘Islamic’ architects (who were in majority ‘Byzantine’)? Was not the Dome of the Rock an imitation of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher?

    • Replies: @ivan
  490. vot tak says:
    @Iris

    I really didn’t give a govno who the person was specifically. The jimmy moglia reference was a joke (for those unacquainted, moglia is bs merchant who writes nonsense for ego gratification and an easy buck).

  491. RodW says:
    @Bombercommand

    The Japanese ‘ringu’ is a modern loan of the English ‘ring’ and is written in katakana, indicating its origin as a loan word.

    Japanese for bow is ‘yumi’ or ‘kyu’. ‘Bo’ is a rigid staff, not a bendy bow.

    The English word ‘bow’ comes from Old High German ‘biogan’, to bend, not from bough.

    • Replies: @Njall
  492. Seraphim says:
    @FB

    In all fairness to the Romans, they always affirmed (even boasted about) their ‘oriental’ origins. Aeneas, Arcadians, Pelasgians (from Thessaly), Rome as a Greek colony.
    Constantine wanted initially to found his new capital at Troy, no less that he himself was from the ‘area’.

  493. @dfordoom

    Arguing with a crank is like arguing with a schizophrenic.

    Hmm … So was Isaac Newton a crank because he believed in alchemy and researched it extensively? Or Tycho Brahe, Galileo Galilei and Johannes Kepler who believed in astrology? Not to mention that many past and present great scientists and thinkers were/are believers of religion. Some were probably mildly schizophrenic, and some perhaps not so mildly (John Nash). But they all enjoyed arguing and debating with other scientists on a whole range of conventional and not so conventional ideas, and benefited from such discourse, as did society.

    • Agree: Mike P
  494. RodW says:
    @Bombercommand

    The English word “Bough” (pronounced “bow”, as in bow and arrow)

    What to make of this? “Bough” is pronounced as in “bow down to”, not as in “bow and arrow”.

  495. @FB

    Agreed History’s a totally weak ‘science’ and which as technique improves archaeology, genetics etc will be hit with huge revisions, for e.g. the pre historic out of Africa theory is increasingly getting clobbered not that other regions grew modern apes but that the ones who came out of Africa intermingled with the others so much that the hard version of the theory no longer makes sense and also that the ones left in Africa mingled with some ghost species which shows in their DNA records.

    The 7 century reduction or the millenium reduction that he (Gunnar’s team) is proposing is revising history in real time so to speak a revision so radical that it will break a thinking person’s mind, I voiced a few objections which are amateurish undoubtedly but then where are the professional objections to it. Why is the academia silent, Gunnar’s theory is crazy (he has an encyclopedia of interesting observations to support it) surely they could ‘lay him on Ice’ but it hasn’t happened they the professionals are unwilling to take him for reasons best known to themselves.

    Shouldn’t such radical historical revisionism be challenged because for one the entire field on inquiry will be shattered, I have no issues with it and wholly welcome such revolutionary thinkers but I don’t think they have made the case to my satisfaction and oh the professionals wholly ignore Gunnar,

    So maybe we aren’t wholly ‘incredibly ignorant.’

    I await the author’s response

  496. ivan says:
    @Seraphim

    Even I with my 2c knowledge of Byzantine art know that the dome is characteristic of the Byzantines. That the Western and Islamic domes all originate from there, which is after all a continuation of the Roman Empire . The extraordinary solemn beauty of Byzantine representations of God and the Virgin Mary was a peak of inspiration. And that is not including the choral music which is in a world by itself if Russian church music is anything to go by.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  497. ivan says:
    @MomsBasement

    Where can we find the horoscope of the divine Morozov? Or is this forever off limits to those of us who can actually fact-check what he maintains?

  498. Bleuazur says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    This Not in his image is a great book, even if for someone living in the 21st century it’s difficult to understand the mentality and “état d’esprit” of the people behind the Codexes. So it was (at least to me) a tough and challenging reading, having to re-read many parts several times.

    Also I believe this philosophy / religion represents actually our real, deep roots (at least in Europe), of which we have been deprived for millenia now. In some way this deeply resonates inside me…

    For some reason (perhaps to disguise its own pagan roots), the Church has been trying to disguise as a fight against heresy what was a fight against pre-christian paganism.

    Indeed you’re probably right. I never bought the story for instance of the Cathars in Southern France being prosecuted by the catholic church because of some form of christian heresy. Quite sure they represented a survival of pagan cults.

    As for “Sofia” you’ll get a lot of answers about her in Lamb’s book!

    Et oui, je suis un peu français!

    “Un peu” juste ? Peut-être comme moi : je ne le suis en réalité qu’à moitié, l’autre étant allemande.

  499. @Grahamsno(G64)

    I understand your shock and anger. I would have felt the same some years ago. But for a lot of reasons, it now makes a lot of sense to me. I know that a thousand objections come to mind, but I have found that all of them can be answered. In the next article, I’ll give more compelling reasons to believe that our chronology, which was not standardized before the sixteenth century, doesn’t work, and I’ll explain where the original mistakes (or conspiracy, if one insists) comes from : the Medieval Roman Church, founded by the Gregorian Reformers.

    About the stratigraphical problem as to why no structures appear below the ones built, I cannot answer but he says that there were something like 35,000 sites where you’d expect to find structures below corresponding to various parts of the problematical period and and yet he couldn’t find one, well he surely couldn’t have pored through all the records.

    It takes a long time to cross-check and digest Heinsohn’s work. Yes, he has already found confirmation for his thesis in many different areas, and continues to accumulate evidence.

    if you wipe out the 7 centuries by saying that it was a gross chronological error what about the people in it,

    Heinsohn insists that he doesn’t wipe out anything, just rearranges everthing in a new chronology, which results in differents historical sequences finding themselves contemporary.
    When did Columbus sail to America ?
    Heinsohn (unlike Fomenko) doesn’t dispute the chronology from around the year 1000. We are talking here about a revision of the first millennium AD, with implication for the first millennium BC.

    Could you please post a timeline of events for us from AD 1 to AD 1500 to judge the soundness of the new Chronology of History you’re proposing.

    I will in the third part. I still have to build up the case for revision in the second part.

    Does this only apply to Europe, I would think not, the world still was connected barely by today’s standards but it was, there has to have been events, dynasties and personalities contemporaneous to events, dynasties and personalities in civilizations like India and China, can we expect the Chinese to shave off 7 centuries of their history and make the Later Han Dynasty contemporary to the Tang dynasty? Isn’t this a serious problem?

    It is! The question is: who made up the Chinese and Indian chronologies, and when? Prior to the 16th century, and the Jesuit influence everywhere, there was no solid big chronology. Before the Chinese and the Indians started counting in AD and BC, ancient dynasties were not necessarily aligned and precisely dated on a chronological charts.

    According to Heinsohn, bible synchronisms led to pharaos Menes and Ramesses II being dated to the 4th millennium and the 14th century, respectively. As a result, Heinsohn concluded that they created a “phantom” history of two thousand years.

    Heinsohn’s revisionism started with ancient Egypt. He is not the only one to do that. The chronology of ancient Egypt has been in deep crisis for a long time. Read John Crowe’s “The Revision of Ancient History – A Perspective,” on http://www.sis-group.org.uk/ancient.htm.

    My mind’s at sea so forgive me for any incoherence it’s my attempt to rescue ‘Imperial & late Antiquity ‘ from Gunnar’s millenium swallowing mania. I still can’t get over why no professional mainstream archaeologist hasn’t disagreed with Gunnar’s radical and devastating intepretation of the stratigraphic record.

    I forgive you, and I empathize with your struggle. I’ll do my best to convince you that :
    part 2 : our chronology simply doesn’t work and was based on a great deception in the first place (the Gregorian Reformers),
    part 3. Heinsohn has a reasonable alternative theory, one that, at least, deserves serious study.

    • Replies: @Kapyong
    , @Grahamsno(G64)
  500. Seraphim says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    The truth is that the Gnostics were the first falsifiers of history, producing numerous ‘alternative’ Gospels and Apostolic writings to attack the Church from the inside. But yes, they were not Christians.
    Of course the ‘cult of Mary’ is not derived from the ‘cult of Isis’. There is no need to repeat what you wrote already.

    • Replies: @gay troll
  501. @James N. Kennett

    As a temporary conclusion: all the oddities that we have pointed out are like pieces of a puzzle that do not fit well within our conventional representation.

    This is how the author concludes, so it is a bit overblown to say he is trashing the entire history. However, I am not quite sure what he is getting at either, since the whole article seems to be beating around the bush. However, I do think that all bushes need beating at least once and look forward to more of this from the author.

  502. gay troll says:
    @Seraphim

    Your apology is pathetic, Gnosticism preceded the fake news of Jesus Christ and was one of the primary heresies that, demonstrating a pre-evangelic Christian theology derived from Pagan mystery, had to be repressed and destroyed by the Church fathers in order to promote their own credibility as historians and custodians of “revelation”. Marcion’s gospel is non historic and non Judaic yet clearly provides the outline for the Synoptics. Furthermore, the incarnated Son of god, born of a virgin mother, who is sent to redeem mankind, and perhaps sacrificed by cruxifixion and even consumed by the people, is Solar mythology that well predates the year Zero. One of the reasons Christianity is so resilient is that it appeals to the truth. It rebukes Jewish chauvinism and enshrines Pagan theology along with pacific philosophy. But by insisting on itself as history, Christianity has poisoned the well of Western culture with Jewish scripture, and the disagreement between Christian and Jewish perspectives is irreconcilable, since both depend on a propagandist understanding of history.

    To believe in Christianity is to believe that the Jewish prophets could see the future, that Jesus Christ was the last Jewish prophet, and that he foresaw the impending destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, who neatly fulfilled the “prophecies” of Christ’s return. To believe in Christianity is to worship Caesar as God, and to defer to Imperial power as a way of life.

    Christ meaning “anointed one” is identical to the Egyptian KRST or Karast which literally refers to the royal mummy who is anointed with oils in preparation for his resurrection in the afterlife. While the principle of eternal life is central to spiritual understanding (and let me hasten to add that I believe in God if not in its Abrahamic conception), the reservation of eternal life for a King only is a gross perversion of reality. We do not need to worship a Pharaoh, or a Caesar, or an Only Son seated beside a throne. Every living thing is a child of God and possessed of God’s power.

    • Troll: Seraphim
  503. Ivan says:

    Your problem is that you cannot believe that a myth can become real. Yes we all have heard about virgin births in other traditions. So why is it so difficult to believe that the Jews too would develop similar beliefs. Jesus Christ simply represents the fulfillment not just of the promise to the Jews but also as implied to the Pagans in their myths. And exactly what is wrong with a prophet being able to see into the future. Isn’t that what prophets are supposed to do?

    • Replies: @gay troll
  504. I’ve always been intrigued by how these ancient manuscripts reached us, since before the Guggenheim press durable lasting books on paper were not available. It would seem that almost everything we have of the literature from antiquity are copies of copies of copies … of some long lost original papiry or parchments, and we accept that they are authentic and genuine copies of the originals.

    https://www.bl.uk/greek-manuscripts/articles/manuscripts-of-classical-greek-authors
    https://www.bl.uk/greek-manuscripts/articles/ancient-books

    Since such is the case, much is open to question.

    Anatoly Fomenko seems to have done a thorough job investigating historical chronology and questioning much of the evidence but I can’t say I’m convinced by the comparative methodology he and others use. Just because there are similarities between events or biographies reported for different ages and different geographical locations it does not imply that they are one and the same. Considering human nature and limitations of human experiences, one would expect to find quite similar stories throughout history at different locations, as for example some of the dynastic intrigues, so it would not be a coincidence to come across similar types of rulers, destinies, and events occurring in parallel in different countries or again and again sequentially in time. One can even find much similarity of events throughout the world with what is inside the Mahabharata yet one wouldn’t claim that someone just copied ancient Indian literature while adding some local flavour and changing names and places.

    • Replies: @tiami
  505. @Grahamsno(G64)

    I don’t know if Fomenko got as far as China and India, but he had this to say about the Mongols:

  506. Kapyong says:
    @First Millennium Revisionist

    “Read John Crowe’s “The Revision of Ancient History – A Perspective,” on http://www.sis-group.org.uk/ancient.htm.&#8221;

    Especially if you believe Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision, (and that the Old Testament is history.)

    “Faith in these depends partly upon the correctness of what is called the ‘astronomers dogma’. This is that the moon and earth have never, in human times, strayed from their present orbits. There is no evidence to support this dogma. However, there is a large body of evidence in ancient texts recording irregular and unexpected astronomical events.”

    • Replies: @BlackDragon
  507. gay troll says:
    @Ivan

    The virgin birth is not a promise, it is an allegory. Isis as the virgin mother is properly understood to be neither a historical person nor an augur of a future person, she is understood to be a goddess which is why her attributes may be inhuman. The cult of Mary was easily imposed atop the cult of Isis and her diverse pagan appellations. But Isis was the mother of God’s son, literally the son of the Sun, who was daily resurrected from his journey through the underworld as well as yearly reborn on the winter solstice (and entered into maturity at the spring equinox). Isis was widely called “Mery” which means beloved. The Egyptian nativity of Horus as born to Isis-Mery at the end of the winter solstice handily predates the Christian caricature of the scene.

    There is no such thing as prophecy except in literature. Prophecy fulfilled in literature is a sure sign of fiction. History is written by the victors, and the Roman Empire was victorious in its war against the Jews. The character of Jesus was intentionally designed to fulfill Hebrew “prophecy” (which as Paine argues is really just minstrelry) as well as to augur the coming of Titus. The Gospels are not attested to until the mid 2nd century, nor are the events they describe attested to by any 1st century writer. They are a fake history backdated and wed to Jewish scripture after the defeat of Bar Kokhba.

    • Troll: Seraphim
  508. tiami says:

    Quite possibly real Rome was Alexandria. Or at least first Rome.

  509. tiami says:
    @Commentator Mike

    I’d love to know what chances there are for one book even a letter to survive (in origanal) for thousand years after being copied generation after generation after generation on wood bark or cat’s skin or papyrus? What about thousands of books? I mean come on 99% of people were illiterate until hundred years ago right? And only literate were clergy especially in dark ages. And what do you do when you are the only literate group around, speak the truth and copy enemies (pagan) books so you can burn them or you manipulate and edit stuff?
    There are only two options either most of ancient books are of later origin and fake or they aren’t that old because they simply can’t be which means there are centuries added.

    • Agree: FB
  510. @MomsBasement

    Thanks for that its such a specialized yet accessible argument for lay persons it’s really stunning that these horoscope aka astrological aka ancient astronomical charts which can be always verified beyond 0 year can’t be really verified I did ask a certain Michael to provide such charts to disprove the author’s hypothesis that 7 centuries were basically primitive historiography, unfortunately Michael who claimed that these charts existed hasn’t answered my question.

    Thanks a lot for such fascinating insights, do you have links to Mr Morozov in English, sorry to ask you that I’m utterly intellectually exhausted arguing against the author but what a challenge,

    • Replies: @MomsBasement
    , @tiami
  511. @First Millennium Revisionist

    Let me take some time probably 24 hrs to respond, nobody on this thread gets the full ramifications of what you’re proposing, I’m an amateur trying to respond to a revolutionary school of thought in history when professionals ought to have done it, alas a severe dereliction of duty from their side. A last shot…before I draft a more coherent reply

    It is! The question is: who made up the Chinese and Indian chronologies, and when? Prior to the 16th century, and the Jesuit influence everywhere, there was no solid big chronology. Before the

    Chinese

    and the Indians started counting in AD and BC, ancient dynasties were not necessarily aligned and precisely dated on a chronological charts.

    Indian history is astonishing there are no indigenous narratives which is astonishing, Indian History is a narrative composed by foreigners who wrote about India, the reason I emboldened the Chinese is that their history is completely a native project and they have historians at least since Sima Qian of the Han dynasty, and they the Chinese treat their history like the Muslims treat their Quran an everliving source of inspiration to them they at least their intellectuals breathe it, to dismiss their narrative of 700 years would put the later Han and Tang dynasty as contemporaneous which would be madness to them. Any how thank you for taking the time to respond to me I await your replies especially the Timeline of that disappeared 7 centuries

    Come on Chinese posters on this site you also have to account for a missing 7 centuries.

  512. Njall says:
    @RodW

    FYI:
    In Icelandic a “bow” is “bogi”, as in “skjota af boga” (shoot [arrow, ‘ “or ’] off a bow); Book of Settlements: “hand-bogi” (a hand-bow); related to German “bogen”.

  513. @Grahamsno(G64)

    You are very welcome. The only accounts of Morozov’s work in English are to be found in English translations of the work of Fomenko and Nosovskiy, who are even more radical in their chronological revisionism that First Millenium Revisionist. Many details of Morozov’s calculations and much commentary on his method can be found in Fomenko and Nosovskiy’s Chronology Volume 1 and also in their Kindle book “The Apocalypse as Seen By Astronomy.” by the same authors. A detailed history of the dating of ancient horoscopes in general can be found in Volume 3 of Chronology. If my memory serves me, Fomenko and Nosovskiy that none of the ancient horoscopes studied by Morozov give ideal, precise datings prior to 1000 AD.

    I think one can learn much from the careful reasoning of these authors whether or not one agrees with their conclusions.

    Most people have formed an opinion of their work based upon their efforts to sort through historical duplications and parallelisms using computer programs. Machine-identified parallelisms are easy to ridicule, but the astronomical research of Fomenko and Nosovskiy is actually the backbone of their method and shows a great deal of integrity.. The parts of their books that deal with horoscopes have been written with great patience and respect for the reader.

    Morozov’s analysis the horoscope in the Book of Revelations is quite straight forward and should have been proposed by others long before. After all, Revelations is full of astrological imagery, gloomy prophesy, and obsession with numerology, so why not look for a horoscope dating either the composition of the book or the apocalypse to come? What are people afraid of? A little Greco-Egyptian religious ideation in a Christian book? Are they afraid that a dating of the horoscope would make Revelations are much more recent book that previously thought, or that it’s gloomy predictions might have already past?

    Three luminaries are mentioned explicitly in the Book of Revelations.

    The Sun and Moon: “A great and wondrous sign appeared in the heaven: a woman clothed with the Sun, with the Moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.” Even I once managed to figure out that the woman here alludes to Virgo, which has a constellation above her head called the Coma of Berenice or The Twelve Stars. So, if a horoscope is to be found in the text, we can be sure that the Sun is in Virgo and the Moon is directly below the feet of Virgo.

    Venus:” To him who overcomes…i will also give him the Morning Star.” Venus is the Morning (and Evening) Star. “He who overcomes is, arguably, a reference to Leo, since Rev. 5.5 reads, “See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals.” So, we can tentatively assign Venus to Leo. This assignment becomes a certainty in the context of what follows.

    Four planets remain to be accounted for. Well, what about the four horsemen of the apocalypse and their horses ,colored brilliant white, red, black, and pale/green respectively? Those colored horses are dead-ringers for Jupiter (brilliant white), Mars (red), Mercury (black, i. e., often invisible) and Saturn (pale or pale green).

    Now, if the “riders” of these four “horses” could be construed as constellations, a potential horoscope might be revealed. The rider of the white horse is an archer. There is only one archer among the zodiac constellations – Sagittarius, so it’s reasonable to assign Jupiter to Sagittarius (Venus, the other brilliant white planet being already accounted for in Leo, where it is close to the Sun, as it must because of its inner-planet orbit). The rider of the red horse (Mars is red) is holding a sword. The only constellation holding a sword is Perseus, close to the boundary between Aries and Gemini So, Mars can be tentatively placed there. The rider of the black horse (Mercury is very difficult to see) is holding a pair of scales. Again, an easy identification with Libra (the Scales), so Mercury can be confidently placed in Libra. The rider of the pale horse (Saturn) is called Death. This is Scorpio, so Saturn can be confidently placed in Scorpio.

    The above pattern of planets and constellations makes astronomical sense, since the inner planets, Mercury and Venus are placed close enough to the Sun to agree with known orbital patterns. (Again, this would not have been the case if Venus were in Sagittarius instead of Jupiter, since Venus in Sagittarius would have been impossibly far from the Sun in Virgo).

    Doing calculations by hand, N. A Morozov was able to identify four possible dates that the horoscope might refer to: 395 AD, 632 AD, 1249 AD, and 1486 AD. There were no earlier solutions within the conventional Christian chronology.

    Fomenko and Nosovskiy make the surprising case that the 1486 AD date is the correct one. The 1486 AD date is the only ideal, precise astronomical solution in every respect. More importantly, Fomenko and Nosovskiy have identified a Medieval and Renaissance tradition of dating the creation of literary and pictoral works of art by embedding horoscopes within them. They have identified over 50 cases of this, including the Paradisio of the Divine Comedy. Their dating of a horoscope embedded in Ovids “1Twelve Labors of Hercules” gives a date consistent with the Grecophile Pope Leo Xs ascension to the papal throne (also no English translation).. Revelations fits nicely into the same scheme of dating by horoscope, even if it reeks havoc on accepted chronology.

    Of course, if the 1486 AD date is correct, commentators on the Apocalypse, such as Jerome, must have lived at the time of, or slightly later than the 1486 AD date. If correct, Fomenko’s dating of the Divine Comedy would have interesting repercussions for Medieval history as well. Their date turns out to (magically!) coincide with the date of the oldest extant copy of the Divine Comedy at the Vatican Library, about 20 years previous to 1486 AD, but still not far from the 1492 AD date that many feared would be the end-times. Unfortunately, Fomenko’s book on the dating of the Divine Comedy has not been translated into English either.

    I started reading Volume 1 of Fomenko and Nossovskiy’s Chronology series a few year ago but was put off by the seemingly chaotic results of Fomenkos mathematical protocol for detecting and evaluating parallelisms and/or historical duplications. Not that such a protocol isn’t needed – people, especially bible readers, live and breathe a jungle of literary parallels and we need answers -; but the results in Volume 1 of Chronology just seemed like “six impossible things to believe before breakfast.”

    I almost put the book aside, but then i came to the astronomical analysis of the Book of Revelations. I had to read that for I’ve long been convinced that Revelations is the most dangerous book in the world because of its use in promoting wars, and I have long been dismayed that structuralism, deconstruction, and other tools for literary clarification have never been applied to this elephant in the room, although they have been applied to the rest of the bible with devastating results.

    Now I understand that the astronomical analyses, not the computer-assisted study of historical parallels is the backbone of Foment and Nosovskiy’s work. People love to ridicule some of the parallels the machine searches coughed up, but they are missing a bigger picture. If fact, I would not be surprised if the divine bolshevik Morozov proves to be, ironically, the savior of the only remnant of Judeo-Christian tradition that can survive the attack of the structuralists, especially when people come to appreciate how devastating the attack is – see “Argonauts of the Desert. Structural Analysis of the Hebrew Bible” by Phillipe Wajderbaum and “Plato and the Creation of the Hebrew Bible” by Russell Gmirkin. Only the leads begun by Morozov and pursued especially in the last ten years by Fomenko and Nosovskiy can rescue a core Christian idea from this thorough attack, but that’s another story.

  514. Seraphim says:
    @ivan

    We the heirs of the ‘Byzantines’ understand these things almost instinctively. Indeed the heavenly beauty of the Hagia Sophia was what conquered for eternity the rough souls of the ‘Rus’, as the Primary Chronicle tells us why the Rus became Christian:

    “When we journeyed among the Bulgars, we beheld how they worship in their temple, called a mosque, while they stand ungirt. The Bulgar bows, sits down, looks hither and thither like one possessed, and there is no happiness among them, but instead only sorrow and a dreadful stench. Their religion is not good.

    “Then we went among the Germans, and saw them performing many ceremonies in their temples; but we beheld no glory (slava) there.
    “Then we went to Greece, and the Greeks led us to the edifices where they worship their God, and we knew not whether we were in heaven or on earth. For on earth there is no such splendor or such beauty, and we are at a loss how to describe it. We only know that God dwells there among men, and their service is fairer than the ceremonies of other nations. For we cannot forget that beauty.”

    What is the recent push to ‘restore the Hagia Sophia to the Muslim cult’ than an expression of the undying hatred of the Muslims for the Christ and spite for Christians, and the urge to profanate and fill it again with ‘their sorrow and dreadful stencha as in the time of Mehemet II (the Turk officials who demand it ‘justify’ it as an act of veneration for their ‘great’ sultan) when they defecated on the altar and in the sacred vessels? Because the ‘Holy Wisdom’,’Sancta Sapientia’, Святая София Премудрость Божия, to which the Church was dedicated is “Christ the Logos”.
    Push that is obliquely supported by the Gnostic who hides under the ‘Revisionist’ label: ‘it is inconceivable to me that Hagia Sophia was founded as a Christian basilica’. Whence his desire to erase Christian history.

    • Replies: @ivan
  515. FB says: • Website
    @MomsBasement

    Amazing information…thanks for taking the time to compose that articulate and easily understandable exposition on what some might consider a somewhat obscure subject…

    I would not be one of those, since the book of Revelation figured prominently in my upbringing…

    Of course I had long ago abandoned it as superstitious mumbo jumbo, but this astrological dating method sounds like something I would definitely like to evaluate in some detail…

    I have no particular problem with the fifteenth century date…this is right around the reformation era that eventually gave rise to evangelism…the denomination I was raised in was heavily invested in Revelation…and it only sprang up in the 19th century…

  516. tiami says:
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    I have put link to Morozovs books two times already. Even though books are in Russian you can simply use “right click and translate” to translate to any language. Not a perfect translation but more than enough for what you are looking for.
    I want to add its the first time Morozovs books are available outside of Russian language. Only Revelations in thunderstorm were translated to German.

  517. tiami says:
    @Grahamsno(G64)

    If Muslim treated Quran like Chinese treated their history there would be no Muslim anymore. Ever heard of Mao Zedong and his cultural revolution? And who funded and organised all such revolutions in last hundred years and for what purpose? Perhaps same org that is responsible for creating modern chronology?

  518. Anonymous[322] • Disclaimer says: