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
Revision in Islamic Chronology and Geography
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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

“Despite the best efforts of generations of distinguished Arabists, the history of the Arabs before Islam remains exasperatingly obscure,” wrote Harvard scholar Barry Hoberman, managing editor of Biblical Archeology.[1]Barry Hoberman, “The King of Ghassan”, 1983, on http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/198302/the.kin...an.htm quoted in Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019). The early history of Islam is in an even worst condition: a “revisionist school of Islamic Studies” is now shattering the canonical chronology, while other maverick scholars call Islamic geography an Abbasid “cover-up”. Yet new difficulties are being raised in the process. The main purpose of this article is to introduce Gunnar Heinsohn’s perspective into the debate, with my own personal input.

The Heinsohnian hypothesis

I have presented Heinsohn’s “stratigraphically corrected” (SC) chronology of the first millennium in a previous Unz Review article titled “How Long Was the First Millennium?” Here is a brief summary. According to Heinsohn, the standard view of the first millennium C.E. is an arbitrary construct that doesn’t stand up to modern scientific archeological evidence. It is too long by some 700 phantom years. In reality, the period from the first Roman Emperor Augustus to the traditional Anno Domini 1000 lasted only about 300 years. The Crisis of the Third Century, beginning at the end of the Severan Dynasty in the 230s, coincides with the Tenth-Century Collapse starting in the 930s.

The distortion resulted from an accumulation of errors and forgeries from the post-collapse centuries, when the reckoning in Anno Domini became commonly used in manuscripts. It was normalized in the 16th and 17th centuries by scholars such as Joseph Scaliger (1540-1609) or Denys Pétau (1583-1652), and then internationalized by Jesuits missionaries, starting with their takeover of Chinese scholarship.[2]Nicolas Standaert, “Jesuit Accounts of Chinese History and Chronology and Their Chinese Sources,” East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine, no. 35, 2012, pp. 11–87, on www.jstor.org

As a result of stretching 230 years into 930 years, simultaneous events happening in different parts of the world were artificially sequenced, leading ultimately to the modern division of the first millennium in three major time-blocks that need to be resynchronized: Imperial Antiquity (c. 1-230s), Late Antiquity (c. 300-640) and Early Middle Ages (c. 700-930). This explains why textbook history is distributed unevenly, most of the known events attributed to each time-block being localized in one of three geographical zones: for Imperial Antiquity, we know a lot about the Roman South-West, but little about the rest of Europe; for Late Antiquity, we know a lot about the Byzantine South-East, but little about Rome and Western Europe; and for the Early Middle Ages, we know a lot about the Germanic-Slavic North, but little about Rome or Constantinople.

Because they are captive to an erroneous chronology, archeologists digging for first-millennium artifacts date their finds differently depending on the locations, even when these finds are at the same stratigraphic depth and exhibit the same technological advancement. To explain the resemblances of excavated materials supposedly separated by 300 or 700 years, they resort to theories of “revival”, “imitation”, spolia (recycled material), or—in utter desperation—“art collections”. Typically, for example, Charlemagne is said to have built in 2nd-century Roman style with materials recycled from the 2nd century. He is also supposed to have revived the classical Latin of Imperial Antiquity (1st-3rd century), down to calligraphic style.[3]According to Paola Supino Martini, the “Caroline minuscule” was a “revival of models of the ancient minuscule”, and so was the majuscule “uncial” used for luxurious manuscripts (Paola Supino Martini, “Société et culture écrite,” in André Vauchez ed., Rome au Moyen Âge, Éditions du Cerf, 2021, pp. 351-384[358]).

The contemporaneity of Imperial Antiquity and Late Antiquity means that the start of Imperial Rome and the foundation of Constantinople are roughly contemporary; “a geographical sequence from west to east was turned into a chronological sequence from earlier to later.”[4]Heinsohn, “Creation of the First Millennium CE”, 2013. However, Byzantine Late Antiquity cannot be simply superimposed on Roman Imperial Antiquity, because it is itself some 120 years too long, according to Heinsohn. The Byzantine segment from the rise of Justinian (527) to the death of Heraclius (641) was in reality shorter and overlaps with the period of Anastasius (491-518). “We know that stratigraphies dated to Late Antiquity (Dyrrachium, Alexandria etc.) lack about 120 years of archaeological substance. Thus, the conventional Late Antiquity period from the 290s to 640s AD has not 350, but only some 230 years with residential strata.”[5]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD: Stratigraphy vs. the Scholarly Belief in Anno Domini Chronology” (2021), p. 91.

The contemporaneity of Imperial Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages means that the peoples living North of the Danube and East of the Rhine did not suddenly emerge from their forest-dwelling primitivism 700 years after the expansion of the Roman Empire. The Saxons, for example, competed with the Romans for the conquest of Great Britain from the early Imperial era. Thus the semi-legendary Arthur of Camelot, first mentioned as dux bellorum in the Historia Brittonum (dated 829) can be reunited with his alter-ego, Aththe of Camulodunum, the Celtic military leader in the period of Augustus.[6]Heinsohn, “Arthur of Camelot and the-Domaros of Camulodunum” (2017). However, here again, the correspondence is not a straight one, because the Carolingian Empire, traditionally placed in 800-841, must be shifted to the 890s-930s (corresponding to the 190s-230s in Imperial Antiquity). “Charlemagne and Louis [the Pious] do not belong to the 8th/9th century, but to the 9th/10th century.”[7]Heinsohn, “Ravenna and chronology” (2020). This is consistent with the appearance of Charlemagne in the Chansons de Geste in the late 11th century. One source of confusion is the multiplication of one Charles into many: Carolus Magnus is in fact identical to Carolus Simplex (898-929) and with other Charles in between.[8]Heinsohn, “Charlemagne’s Correct Place in History” (2014). “Stratigraphically . . . these Frankish rulers belonged to the 890s to 930s CE. Their phase of the Early Middle Ages ran parallel with the Severan period (190s-230s) of Imperial Antiquity as well as with the decades of the Justinian Dynasty in Late Antiquity.”[9]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 84.

Heinsohn’s theory, elaborated in dozens of long web-articles, is a work in progress that still leaves many unanswered questions, but it solves a few crucial problems. I have introduced some of these problems in two articles prior to “How Long Was the First Millennium?” In “How Fake is Roman Antiquity?” I started from Polydor Hochart’s critic of the common idea that Christian monks piously copied, throughout the Middle Ages, the Pagan literature of Roman Antiquity that Florentine humanists later discovered in the attics of European monasteries. From the incongruity of such a notion, Hochart concluded that most of this Roman literature was late medieval or Renaissance forgeries. But Heinsohn’s shortened chronology provides us with a better solution: the 11th century, when most of these texts were last copied, followed closely Imperial Antiquity (=Early Middle Ages), when they were first composed. The seven centuries that our Benedictine monks are supposed to have spent copying them again and again, in defiance to their sacred duty to burn them or scratch them clean, never existed.

In my second article, “How fake is Church history?”, I argued that the standard history of the Roman Catholic Church amounts to a totally counterfeit autobiography, partly motivated by Rome’s rivalry with Constantinople. It is impossible to reconstruct the real history of the Church before the 11th century from the literary sources that were fabricated or adulterated in ecclesiastical scriptoriums. J.M. Wallace-Hadrill wrote about St Benedict’s life: “with no supporting evidence, narrative of this kind could contain almost no historical truth. We can take it on trust or not, as we feel inclined. Scholars have been generally disposed to accept it.”[10]J.M. Wallace-Hadrill, The Barbarian West 400-1000, Blackwell (1967), 2004, p. 47. The same can be said of more central figures like Constantine the Great, whose life and religious policies are known almost exclusively from Eusebius, whose authorship is extremely controversial. The reason why scholars tend to take Eusebius’s account at face value is that, without it, they simply could not write anything about Constantine.[11]We read in the introduction of Eusebius’s Life of Constantine, translated with introduction and commentary by Averil Cameron and Stuart G. Hall, Clarendon, 1999, p. 1: “The Life of Constantine (Vita Constantini, henceforth VC) is the main source not only for the religious policy of Constantine the Great (ruled ad 306±37, sole Emperor 324±37) but also for much else about him. . . . it is not surprising that it has proved extremely controversial. Some scholars are disposed to accept its evidence at face value while others have been and are highly skeptical. Indeed, the integrity of Eusebius as a writer has often been attacked and his authorship of the VC denied by scholars eager to discredit the value of the evidence it provides, with discussion focusing particularly on the numerous imperial documents which are cited verbatim in the work. In contrast, T. D. Barnes’s major book on Constantine, for example, makes substantial use of the VC, and the work remains the single most important source for Constantine.”

Arguably Church history is biased to the point of inversion. For instance, a strong argument was made a long time ago by Walter Bauer that, contrary to the story propagated by the victorious Church, orthodoxy was preceded, not followed, by the great heresies.[12]Walter Bauer, Orthodoxie et hérésie au début du christianisme (1934), Cerf, 2009, pp. 74-88. Also Robert I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Authority and Deviance in Western Europe 950-1250 (1987), Wiley-Blackwell, 2007.. As a result of the Catholic Church’s falsification of its own history, its emergence as the ghost of the Roman Empire, with the pope taking over most of the prerogatives of the emperor—not just the title of pontifex maximus, but also imperial properties, public treasury, and even military affairs—remains largely obscure to historians.[13]Richard Krautheimer, Rome: Profile of a City, 321-1308, Princeton UP, 1980, pp. 70-71. J.M. Wallace-Hadrill nottes in The Barbarian West 400-1000, Blackwell (1967), 2004, p. 30 “the earliest papal documents (dating from the late fourth century) derives from a chancery unmistakably modelled upon the Roman imperial chancery.” Interesting insights are provided by nonconformist scholars such as Joseph Atwill[14]Joseph Atwill, Caesar’s Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus (Flavian Signature Edition), CreateSpace, 2011. or Francesco Carotta, the latter theorizing a probable diversion of the cult of Caesar.[15]Francesco Carotta, Jesus was Caesar: On the Julian Origin of Christianity, An Investigative Report, Aspekt, 2005. This book, and other researches done since, has led me to renounce my earlier working hypothesis that Julius Caesar was a fictitious character.

In Heinsohn’s stratigraphically corrected (SC) chronology, the transition happened in the 11th century, during the Gregorian Reform, the “First European Revolution” as Robert I. Moore calls it.[16]Robert I. Moore, The First European Revolution, c. 970-1215, Basil Blackwell, 2000. This is only one century, not eight centuries, after the end of the Severan dynasty. This explains many strange anachronisms in ecclesiastical history, such as the formal adoption of the Nicene Creed in 1014, seven centuries after the Council that produced it (325), or the standardization in the 13th century of the Latin versio vulgate of the Bible commissioned to saint Jerome by Pope Damasus I (366-384). This also explains why Christian architecture and decorative styles of the 11th and 12th century are hard to distinguish from those of the 4th century, prompting scholars to speak of “a Paleo-Christian revival in Rome at the beginning of the 12th century.”[17]Hélène Toubert, “Le renouveau paléochrétien à Rome au début du XIIe siècle,” in Cahiers Archéologiques, 29, 1970, pp. 99-154.

To understand the conversion of Rome to the cult of a Galilean Messiah, the background of the Severan emperors is an important clue. The founder of the dynasty, Septimius Severus, had married in Syria the daughter of a priest of the god Elagabal worshipped in Emesa (today’s Homs in Syria). His wife Julia Domna played an active role in the empire, especially when their son, Caracalla, became emperor in 211 at 13 years of age. After her death, her younger sister Julia Maesa was sent back to Phoenicia, from where she plotted to place upon the throne her grandson Elagabalus, who had served since his early youth as head priest of Elagabal. The Syrian domination was continued by the thirteen-year reign of Alexander Severus, with whom the dynasty came to an end in 235. This period is covered by the historian Herodian of Syria, probably a member of Julia Domna’s Eastern-oriented literary coterie—like Philostratus who wrote for her the Life of Apollonius of Tyana. Herodian’s information on the god Elagabal (Latinization of the Arabic Ilah Al-Gabal, “God of the Mountain”) is quite interesting:

A huge temple was erected to this god, lavishly decorated with gold, silver, and costly gems. Not only is this god worshipped by the natives, but all the neighboring rulers and kings send generous and expensive gifts to him each year. No statue made by man in the likeness of the god stands in this temple, as in Greek and Roman temples. The temple does, however, contain a huge black stone with a pointed end and round base in the shape of a cone. The Phoenicians solemnly maintain that this stone came down from Zeus. (Book 5, chapter 3)

A black stone worshipped in Syria in the 3rd century provides an appropriate transition for the main subject of this article: Gunnar Heinsohn’s solution to the problems facing historians of Arabia and Islam.

Muhammad and Meccan clan elders lifting the Black Stone into place (13th century)
Muhammad and Meccan clan elders lifting the Black Stone into place (13th century)

Heinsohn on Arabia and Islam

In Heinsohn’s SC chronology, the rise of Christianity in the first three centuries AD and the rise of Islam from the 7th to the 10th century are roughly contemporary. Their six-century chasm is a fiction resulting from the fact that the rise of Christianity is dated in Imperial Antiquity while the rise of Islam is dated in the Early Middle Ages, two time-blocks that are in reality contemporary. The resynchronizing of Imperial Antiquity and Early Middle Ages provides a solution to some troublesome archeological anomalies. One of them concerns the Nabataeans.

During Imperial Antiquity, the Nabataean Arabs dominated long distance trade. Their city of Petra was a major center of trade for silk, spice and other goods on the caravan routes that linked China, India and southern Arabia with Egypt, Syria, Greece and Rome . In 106 AD, the Nabataean Kingdom was officially annexed to the Roman Empire by Trajan (whose father had been governor of Syria) and became the province of Arabia Petraea. Hadrian visited Petra around 130 AD and gave it the name of Hadriane Petra Metropolis, imprinted on his coins. Petra reached its urban flowering in the Severan period (190s-230s AD).[18]Main source : Wikipedia.

And yet, incredibly, these Arab long-distance merchants “are supposed to have forgotten the issuing of coins and the art of writing (Aramaic) after the 1st century AD and only learned it again in the 7th/8th century AD (Umayyad Muslims).”[19]Heinsohn, “Arab coinage hiatus” (2021). It is assumed that Arabs fell out of civilization after Hadrian, and only emerged back into it under Islam, with an incomprehensible scientific advancement. The extreme primitivism in which pre-Islamic Arabs are supposed to have wallowed, with no writing and no money of they own, “stands in stark contrast to the Islamic Arabs who thrive from the 8th century, [whose] coins are not only found in Poland but from Norway all the way to India and beyond at a time when the rest of the known world was trying to crawl out of the darkness of the Early Middle Ages.”[20]Heinsohn, “Mieszko I, destructions, and Slavic mass conversions to Christianity” (2014). Moreover, Arab coins dated to the 8th and 9th centuries are found in the same layers as imperial Roman coins. “The coin finds of Raqqa, for example, which stratigraphically belong to the Early Middle Ages (8th-10th century), also contain imperial Roman coins from Imperial Antiquity (1st-3rd century) and Late Antiquity (4th-7th century).”[21]Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019), p. 8. “Thus, we have an impressive trove of post-7th c. Arab coins lumped together with pre-7th c. Roman coins of pre-7th c. Roman times. But we have no pre-7th c. Arab coins from the centuries of their close alliance with Rome in the pre-7th c. periods.”[22]Heinsohn, “Mieszko I, destructions, and Slavic mass conversions to Christianity” (2014).

The first Islamic Umayyad coins, issued in Jerusalem, “continue supposedly 700 years earlier Nabataean coins.”[23]Heinsohn, “Arab coinage hiatus” (2021). Often displaying Jewish menorahs with Arabic lettering, they differ very little from Jewish coins dated seven centuries earlier; we are dealing here with an evolution “requiring only years or decades, but not seven centuries.”[24]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 51-54.

Architecture raises similar problems. Archeologists have no way of distinguishing Roman and Byzantium buildings from Umayyad buildings, because “8th-10th Cent. Umayyads built in 2nd Cent. technology” and followed Roman models.[25]Heinsohn, “Vikings for 700 years without sails, ports and towns? An essay” 2014, quoting http://otraarquitecturaesposible.blogspot.com.tr/20...v.html “How could the Umayyads in the 8th c. AD perfectly imitate late Hellenistic styles,” Heinsohn asks, “when there were no specialists left to teach them such sophisticated skills?”[26]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 56.

Moreover, “Umayyad structures were built right on top of Late-Hellenistic structures of the 1st c. BCE/CE.”[27]Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019), p. 41. One example is “the second most famous Umayyad building, their mosque in Damascus. The octagonal structure of the so-called Dome of the Treasury stands on perfect Roman columns of the 1st/2nd century. They are supposed to be spolia, but . . . there are no known razed buildings from which they could have been taken. Even more puzzling are the enormous monolithic columns inside the building from the 8th/9th c. AD, which also belong to the 1st/2nd century. No one knows the massive structure that would have had to be demolished to obtain them.”[28]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 82.

Far from rejecting the Umayyads’ servile “imitation” of Roman Antiquity, their Abbasid enemies resumed it: “8th-10th c. Abbasids bewilder historians for copying, right down to the chemical fingerprint, Roman glass.” Heinsohn quotes from The David Collection: Islamic Art / Glass, 2014:

The millefiori technique, which takes its name from the Italian word meaning “thousand flowers”, reached a culmination in the Roman period. . . . The technique seems to have been rediscovered by Islamic glassmakers in the 9th century, since examples of millefiori glass, including tiles, have been excavated in the Abbasid capital of Samarra.[29]The David Collection: Islamic Art / Glass, 2014, on www.davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/materials/glass), quoted in Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 56.

I included in “How Long Was the First Millennium?” one of Heinsohn’s illustrations of identical millefiori glass bowls ascribed respectively to the 1st-2nd century Romans and to the 8th-9th century Abbasids. Here is another puzzling comparison:[30]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 50.

Heinsohn concludes that, “the culture of the Umayyads is as Roman as the culture of early medieval Franks. Their 9th/10th century architecture is a direct continuation of the 2nd c. AD. The 700 years in between do not exist in reality.”[31]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 98. “The Arabs did not walk in ignorance without coinage and writing for some 700 years. Those 700 years represent phantom centuries. Thus, it is not true that Arabs were backward in comparison with their immediate Roman and Greek neighbours who, interestingly enough, are not on record for having ever claimed any Arab backwardness. . . . the caliphs now dated from the 690s to the 930s are actually the caliphs of the period from Augustus to the 230s.”[32]Heinsohn, “Islam’s Chronology: Were Arabs Really Ignorant of Coinage and Writing for 700 Years?” (2013).

This explains why archeologists often find themselves puzzled by the stratigraphy. For example, Haaretz reported that during a dig in Tiberias, archaeologist Moshe Hartal “noticed a mysterious phenomenon: Alongside a layer of earth from the time of the Umayyad era (638-750), and at the same depth, the archaeologists found a layer of earth from the Ancient Roman era (37 B.C.E.-132). ‘I encountered a situation for which I had no explanation — two layers of earth from hundreds of years apart lying side by side,’ says Hartal. ‘I was simply dumbfounded.’”[33]Amiram Barka, “The Big One Is Coming,” Haaretz, August 8, 2003, quoted in Heinsohn, “Arabs of the 8th Century: Cultural imitators or original creators?” (2018).

Heinsohn argues that the Umayyads of the Early Middle Ages are not only identical with the Nabataeans of Imperial Antiquity, but are also documented in the intermediate time-block of Late Antiquity under the name of the Ghassanids. “Nabataeans and Umayyads not only shared the same art, the same metropolis Damascus, and the same stratigraphy, but also a common territory that was home to yet another famous Arab ethnicity that also held Damascus: the Ghassanids. They served as Christian allies of the Byzantines during Late Antiquity (3rd/4th to 6th c. AD). Yet, they were already active during Imperial Antiquity (1st to 3rd c. AD). Diodorus Siculus (90-30 BC) knew them as Gasandoi, Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD) as Casani, and Claudius Ptolemy (100-170 AD) as Kassanitai.”[34]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 59-60, referring to M.D. Bukharin, “Towards the Earliest History of Kinda”, Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2009, pp. 64-80 (67). In the Byzantine period, the Ghassanid caliphs had “the same reputation for anti-trinitarian monotheism as the Abbasid Caliphs now dated to 8th /9th centuries.”[35]Heinsohn, “Islam’s Chronology: Were Arabs Really Ignorant of Coinage and Writing for 700 Years?” (2013). They also, like the Islamic Arabs, preserved some Bedouin customs such as polygamy.[36]Alfred-Louis de Prémare, Les Fondations de l’islam, Seuil, 2002, p. 41-56; David Samuel Margoliouth, Mohammed and the Rise of Islam, Putnam’s Sons, 1905, p. 35-39.

The Revisionist School in Islamic Studies

It is today admitted by many Western scholars that Islamic scriptures, including the Quran, are of a later date than claimed by the canonical account. It was under the Abbasid Caliphate (750-1258) that practically all traditional texts about Islam’s beginnings were written, mostly after the 9th century and mostly outside Arabia, notably in Iraq. As the victorious party in the conflict with the Umayyads, the Abbasids had great interest in legitimizing their rule, and took sweeping measures to destroy sources that contradicted their narrative. It was under the Abbasids that the Quran reached its final stage, and that copies reflecting earlier stages were forever lost.

Another well-known aspect of early Islam is its Jewish background, best illustrated by the 135 mentions of Abraham (Ibrahim) in the Quran, just before Joseph, David, Jonah and Solomon. Entire surahs (Quranic chapters) are devoted to biblical legends. “Islam developed against the background of an Arabia strongly under the influence of Judaism,” states Gordon Newby in his respected History of the Jews of Arabia (1988).[37]Gordon Darnell Newby, A History of the Jews of Arabia, From Ancient Times to Their Ecclipse under Islam, University of South Carolina Press, 1988, pp. 17, 47, 105.

Christian influence on the formation of Islam is also self-evident. Besides the many Quranic references to Jesus, Muhammad’s canonical biography mentions Jewish Christians known as “Nazarenes” or “Nazoreans”, believers in Christ who remained faithful to Moses’ Torah. Living mainly in Syria and speaking Aramean dialects, they were opposed to Trinitarian Christology and regarded the deification of Christ as a pagan deviance. Günter Lüling has argued that “considerable parts of the Koran text itself were pre-Islamic Christian strophic hymns,” and that the Meccan adversaries of Muhammad, the “mushrikun” (“associators”), were not polytheist pagans, as previously assumed, but Trinitarian Christians.[38]Günther Lüling, A Challenge to Islam for Reformation (1993), Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2003 (on books.google.fr), pp. xii-xv.

John Wansbrough’s research into the early Islamic manuscripts, including analysis of the repeated use of Judeo-Christian monotheistic imagery in the Quran, led him to the conclusion that Islam was born out of a mutation in what was originally a Judeo-Christian sect that spread to Arab territories but looked back toward Jerusalem. In 1977, Wansbrough’s student Patricia Crone wrote with Michael Cook a book titled Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World, which traces the origin of Islam in an attempt by Jewish exiles to recover Jerusalem from which they had been expelled in the 70s, and assigning to the Ishmaelites a share in God’s promise to Abraham.[39]Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World, Cambridge UP, 1977 (archive.org), pp. 6-30. In 1998, Robert Hoyland refined Crone and Cook’s thesis by providing other sources in Seeing Islam as Others Saw It. A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam (online here).

From this perspective, the seven-century hiatus between the two episodes is quite extraordinary. Heinsohn’s shortened chronology restores the continuity. According to him, messianic Jews who were ousted by Titus from Jerusalem did not wait for 30 generations in a state of coma, before suddenly waking up with renewed fervor and plans for the reconquest of their lost city.

Linguistic and philology concur. In 2000, a Syriac scholar using the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg published The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran, showing that the Quran emerged in a region linguistically Syro-Aramaic rather than Arabic. And according to Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, about twenty percent of the 6000 Quranic verses are originally written in Aramaic from the 1st/2nd century AD.[40]Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, “Observations on Early Qur’an Manuscripts in Ṣanʿāʾ”, in Stefan Wild, ed., The Qur’an as Text, Brill, 1996, pp. 107 ff, quoted in Heinsohn, “Hadrian Umayyads in Jerusalem. Justice for Jewish and Arab Histories” (2020). So on the one hand, recent scholarship has pushed the final redaction of the Quran forward into the 9th century, while on the other hand, the Quran is shown to be rooted in Syriac literature and liturgy of the 1st and 2nd century. That conundrum finds a solution in Heinsohn’s SC chronology, which shifts forward the 2nd century of standard chronology immediately before the 9th century. What later turned into the new religion of Islam appears to have been originally a messianic movement to reclaim Jerusalem, not seven centuries after the expulsion of the Jews by the Romans, but merely decades later.

Dan Gibson’s geographical revisionism

As mentioned above, linguistic considerations points to a Syriac (Aramaic) rather than Arabic origin of the Quran. This in itself poses a challenge to the traditional geography of Islam. But there are other reasons for questioning the origin of Islam in the Hejaz. The identification of “Bakkah”, the home of Muhammad’s Quraych tribe according to the Quran, with the site of “Mecca” in Saudi Arabia (the two names are extremely close in Arabic writing) doesn’t really add up. In Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam (1987), Patricia Crone showed that what is known today as Mecca was neither an important trading center nor a pilgrimage destination at the time of Muhammad, and that its barren condition does not match at all the Quranic description of Bakkah as a fertile city with fields, grass and even gardens. Moreover, Mecca never had city walls, while Bakkah is described as a fortified city.

In 2011, a book by Dan Gibson titled Qur’ānic Geography expounded the groundbreaking theory that the powerful Nabataean capital of Petra fits the Quranic description of Bakkah, as well as many stories in early Islamic history, while Mecca doesn’t.[41]In “The Sacred City: Discovering the Real Birthplace of Islam,” at 51:22. In 2017, Gibson added to his argument with Early Islamic Qiblas, where he shows that the Qibla (direction of prayer) in Umayyad mosques was Petra, not Mecca. The Qibla was changed during the second Islamic civil war by Abd Allah Ibn al-Zubayr, leader of a dissident caliphate that took refuge in Mecca in 683. It was Al-Zubayr who moved the Black Stone from Petra and built for it a new Kaaba in Mecca. For a century after that, Islam was split between Umayyad traditionalists who continued to build their mosques facing Petra, and the Abbasid reformers who built their mosques facing Mecca. However, after the earthquake that devastated Petra’s water systems in 713, Petra was abandoned and slowly faded from memory. When the Abbasids supplanted the Umayyads in the East in 750, Petra and Mecca were merged in canonical historiography, and an Arabian location was determined for other Quranic locations such as Yathrib (Medina) and Khaybar, where Muhammad dealt with Jewish communities. Gibson’s arguments are presented in the documentary film directed by David Taylor, “The Sacred City: Discovering the Real Birthplace of Islam” (2016).

Gibson’s theory is fully compatible with the Jewish root of Islam highlighted by the revisionist school of Islamic Studies, because Jews are easier to find in the region of Petra than in the Hejaz. The Nabataeans had been allies of the Maccabees during their struggle against the Seleucid monarchs. But there were internal divisions among them, just like among the Judeans. And the Nabataean kings’ later rivalry with the Hasmonean dynasty became a factor in the disorders that prompted Pompey’s intervention. A Roman army besieged Petra, after which the Nabataean king Aretas III paid a tribute, receiving in exchange formal recognition by the Roman Republic. Although Petra became a Hellenized Roman city, it certainly also harbored anti-Roman Arabs and a Jewish community simmering with messianic expectations.

Gibson’s geographical revisionism also dovetails with Heinsohn’s chronological revisionism, since both identify the Arabs who took over Jerusalem in the 8th-9th centuries with the rulers of Petra and Damascus. According to Heinsohn, the Roman conquest of Jerusalem in Imperial Antiquity and the Judeo-Arab conquest of Jerusalem in the Early Middle Ages belong to the same broad period. Let us take a closer look at the evidence in Jerusalem.

Archeology in Jerusalem

Whether they like to admit it or not, archeologists are confused about Jerusalem. One of their greatest sources of embarrassment is their inability to locate the Roman fort hosting the Tenth Legion after the city was destroyed by Titus in 70 CE. In Aelia Capitolina–Jerusalem in the Roman Period, in Light of Archaeological Research (Brill, 2020), Shlomit Weksler-Bdolah insists on this problem: “Surprisingly, despite the long duration of military presence in Jerusalem . . . no archaeological remains have been attributed with certainty to the military camp and its site has not yet been identified.” “One cannot underestimate the difficulty caused by the absence of irrefutable evidence of the Roman army camp in Jerusalem. . . . At this stage, there is no acceptable solution to the problem of the ‘lack of remains’.”[42]Shlomit Weksler-Bdolah, Aelia Capitolina – Jerusalem in the Roman Period: In Light of Archaeological Research, Brill, 2020, pp. 21-22, 42-43.

On the other hand, archeologists and the whole world know where once stood the Herodian temple that Titus’s troops burnt down, for the walls of the “Temple Mount” are still standing. Oddly, this “Temple Mount” overlooking the city has the standard dimensions of a Roman fort. The solution is obvious: the esplanade that Muslims call the Al-Aqsa Compound was originally the Roman fort, first built by Herod in honor of Antony (Fort Antonia), then used by the Tenth Legion. It was arbitrarily determined to be the location of the Temple by the first crusaders in the 11th century, and this mistaken attribution became so entrenched that no one dared question it. When the question was finally raised a few decades ago, it was hushed by the Israeli academic establishment, and would have remained a well-kept secret if not for Ernest L. Martin, who after working for five years with archaeologist Benjamin Mazar, published his unorthodox view in 1994 (read this summary in Popular Archeology). As Gregory Wesley Buchanan wrote in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs in 2011, “While it has not been widely published, it assuredly has been known for more than 40 years that the 45-acre, well-fortified place that has been mistakenly called the ‘Temple Mount’ was really the Roman fortress—the Antonia—that Herod built.”[43]Gregory Wesley Buchanan, “Misunderstandings About Jerusalem’s Temple Mount,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, August 2011. The argument, based on literary sources and archeological evidence, is convincingly presented by Bob Cornuke in this 30-minute film.[44]In complement, the film “The Coming Temple” is interesting, despite its religious overtone.

Ernest L. Martin’s drawing of Fort Antonia and the probable site of the Temple
Ernest L. Martin’s drawing of Fort Antonia and the probable site of the Temple

This controversy has no direct bearing on Heinsohn’s theory, other than to illustrate the state of confusion of archeology in Jerusalem. What is directly supportive of Heinsohn’s theory, however, is the accepted dating of the Western Wall, consisting of 45 stone courses, 28 of them above ground and 17 underground. The first seven visible layers, comprising very large stone blocks, are from the Herodian period. The four courses of medium-sized stones above them were added during the Umayyad period, while the small stones of the uppermost courses are of more recent date, especially from the Ottoman period. Do 700 years really separate the Herodian courses from the Umayyad courses? Heinsohn questions this assumption, defended by archaeological architect Leen Ritmeyer and others: “Although Ritmeyer knows that the Umayyads have built directly on Jerusalem ruins of 70 AD, he believes that they have been waiting for over 600 years to do so. That is why the Temple Mount is said to have remained empty (‘abandoned’) until the 7th century.”[45]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 106.

The Western Wall is not the only piece of evidence of a direct continuity between Romano-Herodian architecture and Umayyad architecture in Jerusalem. Archeologist Orit Peleg-Barkat notes that, “the Umayyad builders used the fragments of Herodian architectural decoration as construction materials.”[46]Orit Peleg-Barkat, “The Temple Mount excavations in Jerusalem 1968−1978 directed by Benjamin Mazar final reports volume V Herodian architectural decoration and King Herod’s royal portico”, in Qedem 57, 2017, pp. 29 ff, quoted in Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD: Stratigraphy vs. the Scholarly Belief in Anno Domini Chronology” (2021), pp. 61-63. According to Heinsohn, “there are no series of settlement layers anywhere in Jerusalem which would be required to substantiate the centuries between Imperial Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages of the Umayyads. So, from a purely stratigraphic point of view, the Umayyads lived, at least since 70 AD, side by side with what is called the Jerusalem of Imperial Antiquity (1st-3rd c. AD).”[47]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 19.

This explains why the Umayyads actually called Jerusalem Iliya, as is attested by their coins, seals and milestones. This is an Arabic form of the name that Hadrian had given the city in the 130s (Aelia Capitolina). Since that name is supposed to have been abandoned in between, scholars wonder why the Umayyads “revived” it; in reality, the Roman Aelia of Imperial Antiquity and the Muslim Iliya of the Early Middle Ages are one and the same .[48]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 69. Heinsohn refers to I.M. Baidoun 2015/16, “Arabic names of Jerusalem on coins and in historical sources until the early ‘Abbāsid period’”, Israel Numismatic Journal, 19, pp. 142-150, (145-46).

Our knowledge of the events of this period is too fragmentary and distorted by religious propaganda to reconstruct them with any precision. What seems quite certain, however, is that Jerusalem, like the rest of Syria, was largely inhabited by Arabs. It is said that the Roman legions who fought for Rome in the 60s, were settled in the area, but according to Flavius Josephus these soldiers were mainly recruited in Syria, “from the kings in that neighborhood” (Jewish Wars, book III, chapter 1). Therefore, writes Heinsohn, “Arab Nabataean soldiers, not men from Italy, conquered Jerusalem for Titus in 70 AD.” The construction of Hadrian’s new city Aelia Capitolina in the 130s was also the work of Arabs, who were master builders (with renowned architects such as Apollodorus of Damascus).[49]Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 108, 61-63.

Does that mean that the Roman subjugation of Jerusalem with Arab mercenaries in the late 60s is identical to the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem 700 years later? No. The Arab mercenaries who fought for Rome against nationalist Jews, then built Aelia Capitolina in honor of Hadrian, cannot be identical with the Arabs who appropriated a Jewish messianic movement and conquered the Levant for themselves after defeating the Byzantine Romans at the Battle of Yarmuk (in 636). Rather, the Arab conquest was a reaction to the Roman conquest, as revisionist scholars suggests—albeit failing to explain the 600 years delay. Nevertheless, it is important to keep in mind that Arabs lived in Jerusalem before they came to rule it under the banner of Islam. And there is no reason to assume that Arab alliances were uniform and stable. Depending on the circumstances, they could fight either for or against the Romans, and either with or against the Jews.

Moreover, there was no clear boundary between Jews and their Arab neighbors before Islam. As Steve Mason reminds us, “the Ioudaioi were understood until late antiquity as an ethnic group comparable to other ethnic groups, with their distinctive laws, traditions, customs, and god. They were indeed Judaeans.”[50]Steve Mason, “Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorization in Ancient History,” Journal for the Study of Judaism, 1 January, 2007. The Bible insists on their kinship with Arab tribes and nations such as the Moabites, the Edomites, the Midianites, the Amalekites, and the Ishmaelites—all descendants of Abraham.[51]Moab is Abraham’s nephew (Genesis 19:31-38), Edom or Esau is Abraham’s grandson (25:25), Amaleq is Esau’s grandson (36:12), and the Midianites are descendants of Abraham by his second wife Keturah (25:2-4), while the Ishmaelites are descendants of Abraham by his servant Agar. According to David Samuel Margoliouth, ancient Hebrew is an Arabic dialect, and even Yahweh’s name is Arabic (Relations Between Arabs and Israelites Prior to the Rise of Islam, 1921).[52]David Samuel Margoliouth, Relations Between Arabs and Israelites Prior to the Rise of Islam: The Schweich Lectures 1921, Oxford UP, 1924.

Besides, Exodus 2-3 makes the Hebrews’ conquest of Canaan originate from the land of Midian, which roughly corresponds to the Nabataeans’ homeland. Moses was the son-in-law of a Midianite priest (kohen) and met Yahweh in Midian.[53]The Midianite hypothesis was first formulated by Friedrich Ghillany (1863, under the pseudonym of Richard von der Alm) and Karl Budde (1899), and has now gained the support of top biblicar scholars such as Thomas Römer (The Invention of God, Harvard UP, 2016). Of course, Moses is traditionally dated two millenniums before Muhammad. But the Exodus story, as we have it, may in fact date from the Hasmonean period, as some “minimalist” biblical scholars now tend to assume.[54]Philip Davies, In Search of “Ancient Israel”: A Study in Biblical Origins, Journal of the Study of the Old Testament, 1992. The Islamic conquest really seems like a remake of the Mosaic conquest from the same region, and both may be separated by just a couple of centuries; it is always about Arab nomads coveting the Fertile Crescent.

At any rate, during the formative years of Islam, Arabs and Jews were ethnically homogeneous. Only when asserting its autonomy did Islam self-consciously widen the gap between Jews and Arabs: this is illustrated by the shift in the direction of prayer from Jerusalem during Muhammad and the Rashidun caliphs, to Petra under the Umayyads, to Mecca under the Abbasids.

Islam and Christianity

If we look at the historical horizon of the Middle East from a Heinsohnian standpoint, we see the birth of Islam roughly contemporary with the birth of Christianity, and not separated by six or seven centuries. There is clear evidence that Islam arose in the context of the early doctrinal controversies surrounding the nature of Christ and the Trinity. Compressing the first millennium into roughly 300 years is not only compatible with the basic facts of religious history, but makes more sense of them.

Heinsohn identifies the monophysitism of the Ghassanids with the early Islam of the Umayyads.[55]Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019). Islam has also been tied to Arianism by Christian heresiologists. John of Damascus (c. 675-749) assumed that Muhammad devised “the heresy of the Ishmaelites” “after having conversed with an Arian monk.” In the 12th century, the Abbot of Cluny Peter the Venerable thought the same after studying the Latin translation of the Quran that he had commissioned.[56]Still in the early 14th century, Dante Alighieri associated Arius and Muhammad in the eighth circle of Hell: Maria Esposito Frank, “Dante’s Muhammad: Parallels between Islam and Arianism,” in Dante and Islam, ed. Jan M. Ziolkowski, Fordham UP, 2014.

Portrait of Libyan priest Arius (detail of a Byzantine icon)
Portrait of Libyan priest Arius (detail of a Byzantine icon)

Strangely, Arianism left virtually no known material trace, even in Spain where it is supposed to have been the religion of the ruling Visigoths for three centuries. This is a great puzzlement for scholars like Ralf Bockmann (“The Non-Archaeology of Arianism,” 2014), or Alexandra Chavarria Arnau (“Finding invisible Arians,” 2017).[57]Ralf Bockmann, “The Non-Archaeology of Arianism – What Comparing Cases in Carthage, Haidra and Ravenna can tell us about ‘Arian’ Churches” in Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed, ed. Gudo M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher, Ashgate, 2014; Alexandra Chavarria Arnau, “Finding invisible Arians: An archaeological perspective on churches, baptism and religious competition in 6th century Spain”, 2017, also available on the Internet. On the other hand, there is no contemporary written record of the Islamic conquest of Spain, leading some Spanish authors to claim that it never happened—as a military campaign.[58]Ignacio Olagüe, Les Arabes n’ont jamais envahi l’Espagne, Flammarion, 1969. The thesis is supported by Spanish Arabist González Ferrín.

Arianism is the umbrella name given to the resistance against the full divinization of the man Jesus. The opposite current that focuses on Christ as a divine entity falls under the broad denomination of Gnosticism. And here again, strange things are observed. Ewa Weiling-Feldthusen notes that there is in the long history of Gnosticism a “missing link”, causing “the ever-ending discussions and controversies among scholars” about “the problem of how to fill the temporal gap between the occurrence of Manichaeism (app. third-sixth century) and Paulicianism (app. ninth century) in the European part of Byzantium.”[59]Ewa Weiling-Feldthusen, “In search of a missing link : the Bogomils and Zoroastrianism,” 2006. Gnosticism was the most serious competitor to Catholicism during the first three centuries AD, but survived another seven centuries despite the fact that the Catholic Church had become all-powerful in the fourth century. Gnostic movements, covering a millennium in standard chronology—from Marcion’s first compilation of Paul’s epistles, to the crushing of the Bogomils’ heirs in the south of France—appear as different waves of the same movement. Heinsohn has noted that the Paulicians, whose original stronghold was close to Tarsus, had as their spiritual leader a man who called himself Silvanus, a name also born by Paul’s travelling companion.[60]Heinsohn, “Saint Paul: Did he live once, thrice, or not at all?” (2020).

Among the Eastern manifestations of Gnosticism, the “Sabeans” deserve special attention because they are mentioned in the Quran as one of the “peoples of the book,” along the Jews and the Nazarenes. Their Arab name, “Subbas,” means “Bathers” or “Baptists.” They may be affiliated to the Elschasaits, the heterodox Jewish-Christian movement where Mani grew up (Manichaeism was still very influential in Bagdad during the first four centuries of Islam).[61]Guy Monnot, Islam et religions, Maisonneuve & Larose, 1986. The Sabeans are also generally recognized as identical to the Mandaeans (from manda, the Aramaic equivalent of the Greek gnosis), who were until 2003 confined to a community of thirteen thousand people in the South of Iraq. Their sacred books are written in an Aramaic dialect bearing much resemblance with the Aramaic once used in Palestine, and their script is close to the Nabataean. Though they live in Iraq and baptize themselves in the Euphrates, their scriptures refer to Jerusalem and the Jordan River, attesting that they came from there, perhaps during the Judeo-Roman Wars. Because they refer to themselves as Nazoraia and honor John the Baptist, the travelling missionaries who first met them in 1652 called them “Christians of Saint John”. But, as B. R. S. Mead explains in her authoritative study, their holy scriptures show John cursing Jesus, calling him a devilish false prophet. It is now assumed that the Mandaeans descend from the disciples of John the Baptist, whom the Gospels portray as competitors to the disciples of Jesus.[62]B. R. S. Mead, The Gnostic John the Baptizer: Selections from the Mandean John-Book Together with Studies on John and Christian Origins, John M. Watkins, 1924. The survival of John the Baptist’s sect for so many centuries is one of the most intriguing riddle in the history of religions, and makes more sense within the framework of Heinsohn’s short chronology.

The history of the different offshoots of heterodox Judaism is still rife with enigmas, and arguably some of them can find a solution within the Heinsohnian paradigm that makes the births of Christianity in Imperial Antiquity, of Manichaeism in Late Antiquity, and of Islam in the Early Middle Ages, roughly contemporary.

But, as I said, there are still hundreds of questions waiting for a plausible answer, and more research is needed before a paradigm shift in global chronology can begin to shake the entrenched academic establishment.

Notes

[1] Barry Hoberman, “The King of Ghassan”, 1983, on http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/198302/the.king.of.ghassan.htm quoted in Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019).

[2] Nicolas Standaert, “Jesuit Accounts of Chinese History and Chronology and Their Chinese Sources,” East Asian Science, Technology, and Medicine, no. 35, 2012, pp. 11–87, on www.jstor.org

[3] According to Paola Supino Martini, the “Caroline minuscule” was a “revival of models of the ancient minuscule”, and so was the majuscule “uncial” used for luxurious manuscripts (Paola Supino Martini, “Société et culture écrite,” in André Vauchez ed., Rome au Moyen Âge, Éditions du Cerf, 2021, pp. 351-384[358]).

[4] Heinsohn, “Creation of the First Millennium CE”, 2013.

[5] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD: Stratigraphy vs. the Scholarly Belief in Anno Domini Chronology” (2021), p. 91.

[6] Heinsohn, “Arthur of Camelot and the-Domaros of Camulodunum” (2017).

[7] Heinsohn, “Ravenna and chronology” (2020).

[8] Heinsohn, “Charlemagne’s Correct Place in History” (2014).

[9] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 84.

[10] J.M. Wallace-Hadrill, The Barbarian West 400-1000, Blackwell (1967), 2004, p. 47.

[11] We read in the introduction of Eusebius’s Life of Constantine, translated with introduction and commentary by Averil Cameron and Stuart G. Hall, Clarendon, 1999, p. 1: “The Life of Constantine (Vita Constantini, henceforth VC) is the main source not only for the religious policy of Constantine the Great (ruled ad 306±37, sole Emperor 324±37) but also for much else about him. . . . it is not surprising that it has proved extremely controversial. Some scholars are disposed to accept its evidence at face value while others have been and are highly skeptical. Indeed, the integrity of Eusebius as a writer has often been attacked and his authorship of the VC denied by scholars eager to discredit the value of the evidence it provides, with discussion focusing particularly on the numerous imperial documents which are cited verbatim in the work. In contrast, T. D. Barnes’s major book on Constantine, for example, makes substantial use of the VC, and the work remains the single most important source for Constantine.”

[12] Walter Bauer, Orthodoxie et hérésie au début du christianisme (1934), Cerf, 2009, pp. 74-88. Also Robert I. Moore, The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Authority and Deviance in Western Europe 950-1250 (1987), Wiley-Blackwell, 2007..

[13] Richard Krautheimer, Rome: Profile of a City, 321-1308, Princeton UP, 1980, pp. 70-71. J.M. Wallace-Hadrill nottes in The Barbarian West 400-1000, Blackwell (1967), 2004, p. 30 “the earliest papal documents (dating from the late fourth century) derives from a chancery unmistakably modelled upon the Roman imperial chancery.”

[14] Joseph Atwill, Caesar’s Messiah: The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus (Flavian Signature Edition), CreateSpace, 2011.

[15] Francesco Carotta, Jesus was Caesar: On the Julian Origin of Christianity, An Investigative Report, Aspekt, 2005. This book, and other researches done since, has led me to renounce my earlier working hypothesis that Julius Caesar was a fictitious character.

[16] Robert I. Moore, The First European Revolution, c. 970-1215, Basil Blackwell, 2000.

[17] Hélène Toubert, “Le renouveau paléochrétien à Rome au début du XIIe siècle,” in Cahiers Archéologiques, 29, 1970, pp. 99-154.

[18] Main source : Wikipedia.

[19] Heinsohn, “Arab coinage hiatus” (2021).

[20] Heinsohn, “Mieszko I, destructions, and Slavic mass conversions to Christianity” (2014).

[21] Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019), p. 8.

[22] Heinsohn, “Mieszko I, destructions, and Slavic mass conversions to Christianity” (2014).

[23] Heinsohn, “Arab coinage hiatus” (2021).

[24] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 51-54.

[25] Heinsohn, “Vikings for 700 years without sails, ports and towns? An essay” 2014, quoting http://otraarquitecturaesposible.blogspot.com.tr/2011/03/typologies-in-islamic-architecture-iv.html

[26] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 56.

[27] Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019), p. 41.

[28] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 82.

[29] The David Collection: Islamic Art / Glass, 2014, on www.davidmus.dk/en/collections/islamic/materials/glass), quoted in Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 56.

[30] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 50.

[31] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 98.

[32] Heinsohn, “Islam’s Chronology: Were Arabs Really Ignorant of Coinage and Writing for 700 Years?” (2013).

[33] Amiram Barka, “The Big One Is Coming,” Haaretz, August 8, 2003, quoted in Heinsohn, “Arabs of the 8th Century: Cultural imitators or original creators?” (2018).

[34] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 59-60, referring to M.D. Bukharin, “Towards the Earliest History of Kinda”, Arabian Archaeology and Epigraphy, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2009, pp. 64-80 (67).

[35] Heinsohn, “Islam’s Chronology: Were Arabs Really Ignorant of Coinage and Writing for 700 Years?” (2013).

[36] Alfred-Louis de Prémare, Les Fondations de l’islam, Seuil, 2002, p. 41-56; David Samuel Margoliouth, Mohammed and the Rise of Islam, Putnam’s Sons, 1905, p. 35-39.

[37] Gordon Darnell Newby, A History of the Jews of Arabia, From Ancient Times to Their Ecclipse under Islam, University of South Carolina Press, 1988, pp. 17, 47, 105.

[38] Günther Lüling, A Challenge to Islam for Reformation (1993), Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 2003 (on books.google.fr), pp. xii-xv.

[39] Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World, Cambridge UP, 1977 (archive.org), pp. 6-30. In 1998, Robert Hoyland refined Crone and Cook’s thesis by providing other sources in Seeing Islam as Others Saw It. A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam (online here).

[40] Gerd-Rüdiger Puin, “Observations on Early Qur’an Manuscripts in Ṣanʿāʾ”, in Stefan Wild, ed., The Qur’an as Text, Brill, 1996, pp. 107 ff, quoted in Heinsohn, “Hadrian Umayyads in Jerusalem. Justice for Jewish and Arab Histories” (2020).

[41] In “The Sacred City: Discovering the Real Birthplace of Islam,” at 51:22.

[42] Shlomit Weksler-Bdolah, Aelia Capitolina – Jerusalem in the Roman Period: In Light of Archaeological Research, Brill, 2020, pp. 21-22, 42-43.

[43] Gregory Wesley Buchanan, “Misunderstandings About Jerusalem’s Temple Mount,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, August 2011.

[44] In complement, the film “The Coming Temple” is interesting, despite its religious overtone.

[45] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 106.

[46] Orit Peleg-Barkat, “The Temple Mount excavations in Jerusalem 1968−1978 directed by Benjamin Mazar final reports volume V Herodian architectural decoration and King Herod’s royal portico”, in Qedem 57, 2017, pp. 29 ff, quoted in Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD: Stratigraphy vs. the Scholarly Belief in Anno Domini Chronology” (2021), pp. 61-63.

[47] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 19.

[48] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), p. 69. Heinsohn refers to I.M. Baidoun 2015/16, “Arabic names of Jerusalem on coins and in historical sources until the early ‘Abbāsid period’”, Israel Numismatic Journal, 19, pp. 142-150, (145-46).

[49] Heinsohn, “Jerusalem in the First Millennium AD” (2021), pp. 108, 61-63.

[50] Steve Mason, “Jews, Judaeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorization in Ancient History,” Journal for the Study of Judaism, 1 January, 2007.

[51] Moab is Abraham’s nephew (Genesis 19:31-38), Edom or Esau is Abraham’s grandson (25:25), Amaleq is Esau’s grandson (36:12), and the Midianites are descendants of Abraham by his second wife Keturah (25:2-4), while the Ishmaelites are descendants of Abraham by his servant Agar.

[52] David Samuel Margoliouth, Relations Between Arabs and Israelites Prior to the Rise of Islam: The Schweich Lectures 1921, Oxford UP, 1924.

[53] The Midianite hypothesis was first formulated by Friedrich Ghillany (1863, under the pseudonym of Richard von der Alm) and Karl Budde (1899), and has now gained the support of top biblicar scholars such as Thomas Römer (The Invention of God, Harvard UP, 2016).

[54] Philip Davies, In Search of “Ancient Israel”: A Study in Biblical Origins, Journal of the Study of the Old Testament, 1992.

[55] Heinsohn, “Justinian’s correct date in 1st Millennium chronology” (2019).

[56] Still in the early 14th century, Dante Alighieri associated Arius and Muhammad in the eighth circle of Hell: Maria Esposito Frank, “Dante’s Muhammad: Parallels between Islam and Arianism,” in Dante and Islam, ed. Jan M. Ziolkowski, Fordham UP, 2014.

[57] Ralf Bockmann, “The Non-Archaeology of Arianism – What Comparing Cases in Carthage, Haidra and Ravenna can tell us about ‘Arian’ Churches” in Arianism: Roman Heresy and Barbarian Creed, ed. Gudo M. Berndt and Roland Steinacher, Ashgate, 2014; Alexandra Chavarria Arnau, “Finding invisible Arians: An archaeological perspective on churches, baptism and religious competition in 6th century Spain”, 2017, also available on the Internet.

[58] Ignacio Olagüe, Les Arabes n’ont jamais envahi l’Espagne, Flammarion, 1969. The thesis is supported by Spanish Arabist González Ferrín.

[59] Ewa Weiling-Feldthusen, “In search of a missing link : the Bogomils and Zoroastrianism,” 2006.

[60] Heinsohn, “Saint Paul: Did he live once, thrice, or not at all?” (2020).

[61] Guy Monnot, Islam et religions, Maisonneuve & Larose, 1986.

[62] B. R. S. Mead, The Gnostic John the Baptizer: Selections from the Mandean John-Book Together with Studies on John and Christian Origins, John M. Watkins, 1924.

 
Hide 187 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. gay troll says:

    Thanks TMR, your essays, and some of Unz’ and Guyenot’s, are the best this place has to offer. Too bad you’re next to PCR screaming in all caps, and Anglin trolling his own fan base, and Unz shilling for big pharma, and everyone acting cute about Jews and Israel while ignoring the elephant in the room (the CIA). But it is what it is.

    Religions are first and foremost fake histories used to justify material ambition. They are given a sheen of the irreproachable by claiming spiritual authority. This is not to say that spiritual authority (i.e. unseen authority) does not exist. But it is of course disingenuous to claim that the unseen has been manifested as the inerrant written word. That which is seen is not spiritual.

    I wrote a comment some moons back saying that Moses was a fictional Hebrew, Jesus was a fictional Jew and Mohammed was a fictional Christian. It is of course self evident that Christian and Muslim scriptures alike are derived from Jewish scriptures. But Jewish scriptures are derived, among other sources, from historical documents, including the Amarna tablets, which strongly suggest that the legend of the Hebrew conquest of Canaan is based upon the Habiru conquest of Canaan that occurred during the reign of the pharaoh Akhenaten. Akhenaten is the historical pioneer of monotheism, and iconoclasm, and his fate is not clearly known, whether he may in fact have been exiled from Egypt and fallen in with the Habiru in Canaan, who had long been his hired mercenaries and monument builders.

    Judaism must have come out of the library of Alexandria. It is likely that the so called Greek “translation” of the Jewish Bible known as the Septuagint, which is admitted to be the earliest known version of the Jewish Bible, is in fact the original Jewish Bible. According to this Bible, the first temple belonged to Solomon, but no trace of its magnificence has ever been uncovered by archaeologists. As for the second temple, it was supposedly rebuilt by Herod. But we might as well presume that Herod build the first temple in the first place. So maybe the Temple and the fort are in fact the same structure.

    We must return to the question of whether Latin is an invented language and Italian Rome a literary construction. Greek Byzantium was the capital of the Roman Empire, and Alexandria was one of its major power centers.

    What matters about these religions is not their purported insight into the will of God, it is their claim to govern from an Earthly capital.

    Jesus Christ began his existence as a mute vision witnessed by the self described charlatan known as Paul. Mark adapted JC into the hero of a fable that asserts the superiority of Greco Roman values over Jewish beliefs. Matthew exploited the tension inherent in JC’s transition from pro Jewish to pro Roman figure by turning the Gospel into a full blooded satire. Matthew of course leads the New Testament as is meant to be understood as the beginning of the Good News, when in fact it is the third stage in its evolution. The next stage was the literal historicization of the Gospel that was accomplished by Luke and Acts, and John, and other assorted pseudoepigraphists.

    Paul’s vision of Jesus didn’t predict the destruction of the Temple that Herod built, rather Paul advertises that his church is based in Jerusalem and his new goyish adherents should send a donation to the Temple there. That’s one of the reasons scholars believe Paul was written before the destruction the Temple, and Mark et. al. were written after.

    I guess my question for FMR is, who were the Caesars?

    • Thanks: Rahan, Peripatetic Itch, donut
    • LOL: GazaPlanet
    • Replies: @sinple
    , @Robjil
    , @Svevlad
  2. Your previous series convinced me and this article strengthens your previous series. I would really like to know more about East Asian chronology it seems like it would be easy to cross check with their annals and records, furthermore you allude to Jesuit revision of Chinese chronology. I hope that will be the topic of the next article.

    • Replies: @gT
    , @Che Guava
  3. sinple says:
    @gay troll

    This is an excellent comment. It’s too bad nobody cares about what really happened centuries ago because it might contradict their favorite book.

    • Agree: Bugey libre
  4. 22pp22 says:

    Ron Unz only allows this guy on his site so that he can laugh at his readership. He once made some comments on Latin linguistics that were so wrong they destroyed his credibility completely,

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @Rahan
  5. anonymous[378] • Disclaimer says:

    Thanks for more in this magnificently intriguing series.

    Jews such as Marcus Eli Ravage boast of Jews creating Christianity and Islam as tools to wipe away native roots of other cultures, replacing them with Jew-serving ones. Christianity undermined the empire, but Greek Byzantines never lost their dislike of Jews from the pre-Roman wars with them, and placed Jews under restrictions … so Arabs were then given Islam, Muslims the Jewish tool to push Greeks out of Palestine, keep Christians on edge, and sweep other parts of the world with pro-Jewish cultism.

    The ultimate Muslim item, the black stone of the Kaaba – likely originally a Hindu-type temple, with Muslims recalling ‘destroying the many idols’ – seems just one more Shiva stone as found in Hindu structures, Arabs giving it quite the Freudian ‘vaginal’ presentation

    People are often curious about the Kaaba interior, here’s a video

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
    • Thanks: Pharaoh
    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  6. gT says:
    @anyone with a brain

    Chinese history must be difficult, they are very protective about their history, and if they could prove the Western timeline wrong they would have done that to prove that they are superior to the West.

    But yes, the Western Christian and now the Arab Muslim histories both have this 700 year issue. Plus the Jews also apparently have a 700 year gap in their history when no Jew wrote anything new, nor did the language change at all during that period.

    A more interesting question would be to ask if this 700 year issue came about accidentally or intentionally.

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Itch
  7. Ron Unz says:

    Well, I’d have to say I’m as extremely skeptical of this analysis as I had been of the previous items in the series.

    A theory claiming that Jesus and Muhammad were actually contemporaries seems very doubtful to me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I don’t see even a sliver of that.

  8. @Ron Unz

    Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

    Is the claim that extraordinary, though?

    It depends which side you start on.

    One man’s “extraordinary” is another man’s “ordinary”. Seems that it depends on when the question is posed.

    As an example: consider two claims about the Old Nonsense.

    Claim ①: Adam, Noah, Moses, David, Solomon, Joshua etc are fiction – and much of the Old Nonsense is #FakeNews;

    Claim ②: that Adam, Noah, Moses, David, Solomon, Joshua etc are historical figures – and much of the Old Nonsense happened as described, give or take (obviously excluding the bits that entail the Earth existing before the stars: that’s just idiotic).

    Which claim is ‘extraordinary‘?

    For the bulk of the last 2000 years, ① was. Anyone who showed the slightest support for ① would be lucky to get out alive.

    Until the turn of the 20th century – and for at least half of the 20th century itself – the claim that the Old Nonsense was [broadly] historically accurate was not remotely extraordinary.

    As far as the laity knew, all of the events and personages in the Old Nonsense had been fact-checked, and people who clung to ① tended to get a well-deserved debunking (prior to the Enlightenment, such debunkings were often fatal).

    I’m just old enough to remember when ‘Moses Mythicism‘ was a genuinely heretical stance: now it’s basically taken as self-evident.

    Now there’s controversy as to whether the first two letters can be changed without loss of argument (Mo Je); the Historicists have had to revise downwards their claims about Jesus’ magic powers, in order to make the Mythicist claim look less ordinary.

    The ordinary version of the Jesus (and Moses) Mythicist hypothesis boils down to:

    There are people who will make shit up if they expect to gain from it

    .

    Which, it turns out, is the same hypothesis being advanced by the ‘missing 700 years‘ crowd.

    I’m not convinced that Heinsohn and his ilk are right, but if a controversy hinges on whether or not some powerful fuckbags deliberately maintained a falsehood in order to gain from it… ‘they did not‘ is the extraordinary claim and always has been.

    Anyhow… as an aside: thanks for giving a platform for pieces like this.

  9. raga10 says:

    Interesting idea but if we shortened the millennium roughly by half as you seem to suggest, isn’t that something that we should be able to confirm or deny by using scientific techniques like carbon dating or whatever? I know carbon dating is not super precise when large time spans are involved, but this is a difference of several hundred years just less than two thousand years ago. We’re not talking about millions of years here.

  10. Years ago I would pick up a King James bible on the bedside table and start reading a random Old Testament page. This was the best sleep-inducing routine I’d ever tried.
    This long essay might rival that, for my eyes kept glazing over as I tried to make sense of what I was reading.

    That is, until I reached the Archeology in Jerusalem header. The first two paragraphs of that section are a rarely seen gem.

    Oddly, this “Temple Mount” overlooking the city has the standard dimensions of a Roman fort.

    Wonderful dry humor, that. Destroying that Islam mosque on the site of the old Roman fort is about Muslim Removal, not religion.

    Didn’t understand a word of the rest of it, but I can surely recommend those two paragraphs.

    🙂

  11. Blade says:
    @Ron Unz

    Let me correct that for you:

    A theory claiming that Jesus and Muhammad were actually contemporaries seems very stupid to me.

  12. Jon Chance says: • Website

    The profound ignorance and religious arrogance of today’s would-be citizens is utterly astonishing.

    How many people today understand the real definition of “Jew” or “money”?

    If the schools, colleges, universities, religious institutions, governments, and media monopoly have so effectively dumbed-down the entire population during the last 100 years, is it possible to sustain (or reestablish) a genuine democracy today?

  13. This guy’s obsession with “the Dark Ages” not giving him enough information have taken him down a rabbit hole of nonsense.

    Quite frankly, his theory falls flat based on the sheer effort versus who needed to be fooled with very little payoff. He’s talking about an elaborate forgery conducted by thousands of people to fool…a few hundred people in the immediate few centuries afterwards who could read or write.

    And for what purpose? He gives no clear rationale. Because conspiracy hoaxes need a payoff, darling, and you’ve given none.

    His “Jesus and Muhammad were contemporaries” is even more laughable than the “Jesus was really a Hindu/Buddhist wise man lost in translation” nonsense some anti-Christian atheist garbage that gets peddled from time to time (John Hurt was in a movie featuring such tripe).

    This guy is right up there with flat earthers.

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @Peripatetic Itch
  14. Seraphim says:

    Ah, Mr. Guyenot is at it again! Peddling Fomenko/Heinsohn ‘merde’ with French ‘jactance’.

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  15. Ohboy says:

    Man, I thought that this was going to be anti Christian but you are telling me that Christianity conquered the entire known world in only three generations? That is incredible. I thought that proving victory over the pagans would have taken hundreds of years but apparently we have a buzzer beater world conversion of the known world in 100 years. How can you doubt the divinity of christ if that was the case?

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  16. sally says:

    I agree with comments made by Gay Troll.. there is much to be learned from the article. I agree with your comment, failure of the masses to care about most anything is a common human sin. Educated persons have not explained why the masses have no interest in that which contradicts their favorable movie or book.. has anyone done revealing research on that subject?

    This ignorance syndrome i call it..

  17. Rahan says:
    @22pp22

    Ron Unz only allows this guy on his site so that he can laugh at his readership. He once made some comments on Latin linguistics that were so wrong they destroyed his credibility completely,

    When publishers looked at the manuscript of then unknown Marcel Proust, they laughed as his grammar, as his clumsiness with it destroyed his credibility completely.

  18. Arno says:
    @Ron Unz

    I may have misunderstood the analysis but I did not understand it to mean that Christ and Muhammed were contemporaries but, rather, that Islam’s origins are not with Mohammed but, instead, are an evolution from a non-trinitarian Messianistic-Jewish or Christo-Jewish sect such as the Nazarenes.

    The evidence for the Islamic Mohammed having existed at all are scant and the name Mohammed was at the time an honorific that Christian Arabs also applied to Christ. I suspect the Islamic Mohammed is an amalgamation of different Mohammeds that was invented to give Islam its own prophet that was necessary to legitimize the Abassidian revision of earlier, proto-Islam into its current theological form.

  19. Wallyrlz says:

    Muslims are notoriously awful when it comes to white washing their own history. Many of the accounts that were critical of Muhammad were destroyed by the Arabs, and any secular historiography of the region is simply deleted from the consciousness. How many Arabs realize that the early Muslims used to pray towards Petra? How many of them realize that Muhammad stole the word allah from a pagan moon god? How many Arabs realize that many of the Islamic beliefs and practices such as halal slaughter, hajj, and aushura are stolen from either Christianity, Judaism or Paganism?

    None of them know anything about their own culture or history because Islam drowns out the critical and rational voices and replaces it with emotional screeching.

    Horrible culture and horrible religion, and this is coming from someone that was raised in a Muslim household.

    • Agree: anyone with a brain
    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Bugey libre
    , @Faisal
  20. @Ron Unz

    The only claims are that they are holes in the official narratives and chronologies and that these deserve to be reevaluated. It is not dogmatic, it is only questioning our “sacred cows”, thus it only an intellectual exercice that indeed is rather disturbing and potentialy disruptive for billions of people.

    Freeing oneself from the framework of the official narrative is interesting and potentialy empowering.

    Thanks for sheltering this kind of work.

  21. @Seraphim

    Are you French mr would be celestial winged creature? Where did you see any reference to Fomenko in that article? Did you read it? If not, well, your comment is rather ‘shity’.

    Bon vol

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  22. @Ohboy

    Hello,
    The Covidian narrative took only a couple of month to “officialy” conquer the entire known world. Yet their are still ‘covidian pagans’ refusing to be baptised with Mnra injections. The conversion of the Baltic population took time and in Skandinavia there are still people who have kept the old beliefs, like today some people trust natural immunity or Ivermectin and will keep their understanding notwithstanding what the Covid Supreme or Covid Sanhedrin say or menace.

    That being said “love one onother” is definitely a very subversive idea in our crazy times of the worst ‘pagan’ revival to which I suscribe, so have a good day (or night).

    • Thanks: Zorost
  23. mcohen says:

    Why spoil a fairytale that gives people hope.the culture,the ritual,all the nonsense makes life interesting.
    This past day of atonement my wife and i went down to a river and stood on small wooden bridge and read out all the sins one can commit from my siddur.quite a long list. At the same time we cast small stones into the river.surely a colourful ritual made up by some old geezer with a long grey beard

    I started reading about the part of david asking God to “sprinkle clean waters upon us” and at that very moment a bird flew into the water and started cleaning it’s feathers.

    We both felt some sort of connection and felt really good about the whole ritual.Still think and talk about it with wonder.

    I wonder if it had been any different if we were not preforming the ritual and merely observing a bird cleaning its feathers.Some sort of coincidence.

    As you get older and these type of experiences accumulate it makes you wonder about the true significance of those “fairytales” or old nonsense as someone calls it.

    What will you replace it with.?

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  24. For those who want to know more about Carrota’s work, a good documentary has been done:https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jesus+cesar+carrota

  25. @Ron Unz

    Nothing extraordinary about it at all. We are now seeing how easy it is for the victors of any war, military or ideological, to rewrite history and destroy all or almost all traces of their rewriting, so that subsequent generations accept their fiction as absolute gospel. It would be extraordinary if the power cabals of previous generations, going back thousands of years, had not figured out the game in the same way.

    Orwell tried to set us straight. Most of us just have yet to realize he was writing hidden history.

  26. @R.G. Camara

    He does offer facts and striking coincidences. You just tag him with the “conspiracy theorist” label and toss him down the garbage disposal.

    That ad hom is so tiresome. Try coming up with some real arguments.

    • Thanks: donut
    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    , @raga10
  27. @gT

    A related question is whether Joseph Scaliger was a Marrano Jew? And how his chronology became accepted over the objections of Sir Isaac Newton?

  28. Seraphim says:
    @Bugey libre

    You missed all previous articles of Mr. Guyenot in the series ‘How fake is…’ in which he obstinately ‘demonstrates’ that Christianity is a fake using the ‘New Chronology’ fad of Fomenko.

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
    , @Ocko
  29. @Ron Unz

    Ron, I know you’re a busy guy, but I think it would really behoove you to go through some of the compilations of well known logical fallacies. Beg the question, Straw Man, etcetera.

    The relevant one here is usually called “argument from ignorance”. (Sometimes “appeal to ignorance”.) It has, for example, its own Wikipedia page. That page begins as follows:

    Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents “a lack of contrary evidence”), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false.

    Or, more to the point, a bit further down, we have:

    In debates, appealing to ignorance is sometimes an attempt to shift the burden of proof.

    The main point of the MR articles is to make the case that the available archaeological and documentary evidence is much more consistent with a revised chronology that is about 7 centuries shorter than the standard received history. You are arguing, it seems, that the author must demonstrate the negative, that these 7 phantom centuries did not occur. And likewise, there is absolutely no onus on you to present the best available evidence that these 7 centuries (what in Europe basically corresponds to the so-called “dark ages”) really did happen.

    A theory claiming that Jesus and Muhammad were actually contemporaries seems very doubtful to me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I don’t see even a sliver of that.

    I’m not sure what the formal name of this fallacy is. It might be the same as what the above-linked page refers to as Argument from self-knowing. Or it’s related to that anyway. I myself would just call it the “The world exists in my head” fallacy. You cannot conceive of something being true, or it sounds wrong… therefore it cannot be true. As I recall, this was your main “argument” in the moon landing debate of a couple of years ago. However, it’s not really an argument. In fact, it is a well known logical fallacy.

    Whatever is true is true, Ron. Objective reality just exists and is completely indifferent to whether your mind can conceive of it…

    Now, specifically, as for Jesus and Muhammad being contemporaries, what is the strongest proof available that those two individuals even really existed? Note that I’m not saying they didn’t but I think it makes sense in this context to pose this question. So, again, what is the strongest available evidence that these are real historical persons in the first place?

    You see, at some point, an aspiring intellectual must finally achieve a certain milestone. (And note that I’m not boasting. It took me an awfully long time!) He (or occasionally she!) must grasp the distinction between real facts and storytelling. I continually get the feeling that you never have reached this point. For you, if enough people (particularly, the people you label as “prominent”) tell a story, then the story somehow becomes a “fact”.

    Oh, I almost forgot to mention this: your COVID argumentation is also plagued with this basic problem. So many people with impeccable credentials are telling some story so the story must be true… Think again, Ronnie…

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
    • Replies: @Half-Jap
  30. History is aged propaganda. No one knows what the truth is regarding events so far distant in time.

    To waste resources trying to discover the actual truth when the evidence is tainted seems a fools errand.

    Besides, all of religion is just rehashed myth and most of ancient history is pursued in the quest to legitimize the religious lies. When one sees clearly that religion and government are one and the same thing, it becomes obvious that things ascribed to religion are just political events. To put any trust in ancient politics is just as ridiculous as putting trust in modern politics.

    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  31. @mcohen

    Very interesting comment and good experience to share but you and your wife are not going to make it a protocol or a rule for the rest of the world for the eons to come. You won’t try to be a prophet and an earthly ruler and build temples or statues of the bird. You won’t ask you followers to wear a feather as necklace. You won’t set as a rule that those who throw stones from a concrete or steel brige or witness a frog on a leaf afterward are heretics who should be dismantled or burned.

    Respect

  32. Robjil says:
    @gay troll

    everyone acting cute about Jews and Israel

    9 11 – Israeli and Zionist footprints all over it.

    The massive call for censorship by ADL, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and others like their ilk for those who criticize Top Jewish behavior or Israel. This has been going on for at least 100 years. Here is a 1927 controversy about Jewish control of media.

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/05/20/king-of-kings-1927-and-the-origins-of-jewish-cultural-censorship/

    The episode has clear parallels with our contemporary situation. Many of the tactics pioneered in the Ford-DeMille years remain in place a century later. Blackmail, spying, boycotts, and behind the scenes pressure remain the mainstays of the ADL’s tactical bag of tricks. The old MPPDA-ADL partnership sees its postmodern equivalent in the form of Big Tech companies that allow the ethnically solipsistic fanatics of the ADL to declare what is or is not hateful content that should be censored from public view.

    Paypal and ADL work together. People buy things with Paypal. Why is Paypal joining with the ADL? Is ADL the CIA? I think not.

    https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/08/12/paypal-like-minded-companies-dont-want-conservatives-money/

    PayPal, the payment processing company, recently announced it will partner with the Anti-Defamation League to identify “extremist” groups that will be denied service.

    USS Liberty

    Federal Reserve – Paul Warburg and the creation of the FED.

    https://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/SecretsOfFedReserve.pdf

    – Garrison says that Warburg wrote him on February 8, 1912.
    “I have no doubt that at the end of a thorough discussion, either you will see it my way or I will
    see it yours–but I hope you will see it mine.”
    This was another famous Warburg saying when he secretly lobbied Congressmen to support his
    interest, the veiled threat that they should “see it his way”. Those who did not found large sums
    contributed to their opponents at the next elections, and usually went down in defeat

    Pelosi – If the capital crumbles, the first thing we will do is support Israel

    Seven Nations to Destroy – the first Israel of the Torah was first created this way.

    Whatever CIA does, it is a sidekick, since it does nothing to counter all this.

    • Replies: @gay troll
  33. @Ron Unz

    If you are feeling capable of the necessary energy of mind and lucidity can you provide a visual representation of what the author is implying in the shape of a cosmological/astronomica/geophysical timeline tied to conventional dates on which is plotted all the major supposed events of history in the first millenium including, especially, those the author says are wrongly dated.

    Wikipedia lists 13 eruptions of VEI 6 or greater in the first millennium AD. I found that when trying to look up the great weather changing event of about 546 AD but it appears that it might have been an asteroid strike. Earthquakes and solar eclipses should enable a pretty good chart of reality to be created against which the author’s claims can be assessed.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  34. Robjil says:

    Heinsohn bases his theory on statigraphy. Statigraphy is not a good way of studying history. It is not foolproof. There are many examples of gaps in sediment everywhere in the world. People dig up things all the time, the soil can be disrupted by that too.

    https://againstjebelallawz.wordpress.com/2011/12/24/why-gunnar-heinsohn-does-not-understand-stratigraphy/

    Let us then write the rules of stratigraphy, which Gunnar Heinsohn clearly does not understand.
    Rates of stratigraphic deposition are not constant, and may be reversed. A corollary of this rule is that stratigraphic gaps do not necessarily indicate a gap in sediment deposition, though, in archaeology, a lack of artifacts does indicate a lack of occupation. Another corollary of this rule that gaps in sediment accumulation can occur. For example, Tell el-Hesi (the first tell excavated in Palestine) only gained four feet of sediment between c. 300 BC and 1891. Roughly the same amount of ash and lime was deposited within two hundred years (between the Amarna era and that of Ramesses III). Some billion years are missing from the exposed strata in the Grand Canyon. At Jericho, the Early Bronze strata are the first ones found on top of the tell, even though settlement continued on and off into the Persian period. Sediment deposition rates may depend on environment, construction, stratigraphic composition, and climate.

    Objects identify a time period better.

    Dateable remains (such as pottery, fossils, and other objects) within strata often date them better than anything else. These remains are either dated by the historical dates of strata (these can sometimes be determined by coins, scarabs, foreign pottery, cuneiform tablets, ect.).

    • Replies: @Sparkylyle92
  35. @Kratoklastes

    My theory with regard to Fomenko and his cohort: their project was created as a calibration exercise to establish the limit of absolute human credulity. It’s very large. You can actually get away with quite a lot. See JFK, 9-11, Corona.

    The important question they wanted to know the answer to is just how much can you get away with.

    • Agree: Robjil
    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  36. @RoatanBill

    Hello,
    Mc Cohen’s comment is interesting because all political/religious leaders from the distant past (maybe not that distant because it is the theme of that thread, lol) up until now are trying to use ‘visionnaries’, oracles, mystics, ceremonial magic, magic etc… To keep their power or simply to rule in a world of uncertainty. We could also add that now they try to use datas from highly complex computing system but it is the same processus. What is reality?
    The institutional religious fact is not the whole story.

  37. gay troll says:

    The way I have made sense of these essays, a disaster occurred c. 230 CE which led to the fall of the Roman Empire whose capital was Byzantium. At that point, gospel Christianity would have been maybe 100 years old. Mark was written as early as 80 CE, and Paul as 40 CE, but Christianity doesn’t really show up in the literary and historical record until 130 CE.

    What had Christians been doing in that interim between the popularization of their genre and the disaster of 230? Well they had been carrying on the work that Akhenaten began a millennium before, on a new continent defacing and destroying idols, trampling any image of God and persecuting the “polytheists”. They showed an electric vigor for erasing the monuments of the past, which carried over to the written word. We know this is how Christianity began and we also know this is how Christianity matured, by burning, redacting, and bowdlerizing all history and philosophy that contradicted the gospels.

    Therefore they had the inclination to rewrite history. The disaster and subsequent fall of the Roman Empire gave the Christians the means to centralize political power. What followed were the dark ages. FMR describes this period of time, during which Christian clerics had absolute power to rewrite history, as a kind of firewall beyond which it is difficult to see clearly. They had the inclination, they had the means, and they had the motive to legitimize their Messiah by adding 700 years to his resume.

    Islam would have emerged more or less alongside Christianity, in the period between 130 and 230 CE. IMO it is completely wrong to say Jesus and Mohammed were contemporaries. No, they are both literary figures and Jesus existed first. Like Jesus, Mohammed’s name is a title (the Praiseworthy) and his corporeal existence is not properly attested to. We might note that Islam has an especial influence from Pauline Christianity, from which they acquire the covering of women’s heads, and the subjugation of women, and the fear and hatred of sexuality.

    History is religion, and religion is history. Religion may or may not also be spiritual. Spiritual religions, which claim authority from the unseen, are given to produce fantastic histories, citing miracles as history. Judaism was a spiritual religion, but by 230 already an anachronism. The art of history has always been determined to become a science. And since neither the Gospels nor the letters of Paul offer a scientific record of Jesus’ life, Christianity was also a spiritual religion. So what did the Christians do? They added 700 years of fake historical science to their spiritual religion. All while continuing to expunge actual history and science from the literary record.

    Nowadays the spiritual has been removed from our mainstream histories. But these histories are still religions: they still bind people together in common belief and purpose, often to the sole benefit of the elite class. By removing God and miracles from the equation, modern religious engineers no longer need to enlist faith. Now they say, the science is settled. The truth in inarguable. And they tell us stories about 6 millions Jews vanished into thin air, and The Right Stuff strutting on the Moon, and Islamic terrorists with box cutters who hate us for our freedom causing the total demolition of three skyscrapers with two passenger jets.

    What humanity needs is a religion based on humane principles, that is not beholden to an elite class and their claims about the past or the future. What we need is a truly scientific religion. From this can follow a scientific history, and even a scientific spirituality. Because the spirit, although unseen, is nevertheless real, and present, like the oxygen in our lungs, waiting to be discovered.

  38. gay troll says:
    @Robjil

    Whatever CIA does, it is a sidekick, since it does nothing to counter all this.

    Wrong, the CIA enables all this. I am not trying to absolve Israel or Judaism of guilt. But without the CIA holding America hostage, and using America to hold the world hostage, Zion would already be an abandoned anthill.

    Goodbye friends, like KISS this will be my 17th and final farewell comment. It’s been fun but methinks it’s time to BDS Unz.com.

    • Replies: @Marcion
    , @RadicalCenter
  39. @Emil Nikola Richard

    In the case of Fomenko, there is a pro Russian political agenda.

  40. @Wizard of Oz

    If you are feeling capable of the necessary energy of mind and lucidity can you provide a visual representation of what the author is implying in the shape of a cosmological/astronomica/geophysical timeline tied to conventional dates on which is plotted all the major supposed events of history in the first millenium including, especially, those the author says are wrongly dated.

    But hold on… if you are interested in this, why don’t you do this yourself?

    Oh, drat! I momentarily forgot who I was addressing! The above actually entails some work and this guy is just a worthless troll. He just challenges other people to do something or other. He never does anything himself!

    This reminds me of my last article on this site. Well over three years ago. (Unbelievable. How time flies!) People would ask me whether I had checked this or checked that. For example, I should check whether Betty Ong was really Betty Ng or Betty Ow, who had later changed her last name to Ong. (They come up with some farfetched theory like that and I should somehow try to verify their theory!) Or I should contact the (alleged) family and ask them whatever questions…. (Why don’t you, Monsieur ou Madame Troll?) I should go off to San Francisco (5,000 miles from where I live!) and rummage around every yard sale in a radius of I dunno how many miles trying to find an original 1974 George Washington High School yearbook… I should….fill in the blank

    Finally, trolls like you are like dinner guests who show up at somebody’s house empty-handed, no bottle of wine, no nothing. And they repeatedly query the host, who is the one who put everything on the table: why don’t you put some more hors d’oeuvres on the table, serve some schnapps…go find us some hookers…

    Well, whatever, maybe I’m getting carried away, but surely the point stands. At some point, in any sane world, you useless gits should bring something or other to the table, no?

  41. @Wallyrlz

    Can you give reference because from my knowledge, Allah means ‘the God’? Thanks

  42. @Kratoklastes

    Imagine a being coming to consciousness as a baby must do but without the help of examples of other human beings all around it to learn from. Imagine all that exists is a conceptual reality where all concepts already exist and this being somehow arises out of these concepts in a way it initially has no understanding of. In such a conceptual reality you have no idea if it is “idiotic” for light to be understood or sensed before darkness or loud before quiet or Earth before stars or light before stars. There is nothing “idiotic” about creation. If a bright four year old can pick apart a creation story in 2 minutes then you can bet your bottom dollar that it has already stopped thinking like a child, it has already lost something on its way to becoming a “smart” human.

    This being is called God and as God must believe in God you had better never try to confront him with the reality of who he is because if he believes you he has lost faith in the thing that dragged him out of the mire of concepts from which he was born in an immaculate conception. Only God can create God and all that is required for reality to exist is that God has faith …. in himself.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  43. Great article. I have had some interesting conversations with colleagues (academia) off the record, and there are many, many questions and concerns about the standard narrative of history and the acceptable theories off to the sides. If some of the possibilities are true, or even somewhat true, then it would fundamentally change everything we think we know about our past in many ways (events/chronologies, religious history, identity, etc.) I have met more than one historian and archeologist that will say “It’s all fake” off the record, after a couple drinks, but then continue to publish the standard narrative. One particular Roman scholar I knew, who is no longer with us, believe by the time of his death that almost all of so-called ancient Greek and Roman history was “fake” and the creation of Renaissance authors and Early Moderns. I have many doubts myself.

    • Thanks: Bugey libre
    • Replies: @Ron Unz
  44. @Seraphim

    The fact is that nowhere in this article Laurent refers to Fomenko’s speculations but to Heinsohn’s work.

    Mr Guyenot is not promoting any of the scholars trying to reframe the official chronology, he is writing articles about their thesis. Yet he thinks there are flaws in the official version of chronology or narration of history, how come can one blame him? He is doing it because science is a debate.

    It is a valuable work because it potentialy brings sound or flimsy critics, refutal of their work. History is not settled in anyway. If you don’t think these scholars are right or their thesis are flawed, just bring your elements of contradiction. Personnaly, I am very interested in these debates and the datas which are brought by informed commentators.

    I have read his precedent articles and really enjoyed very informative comments. Ad hominem comments don’t bring anything of value.

    Bon vol, sans rancune…

    • Agree: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @Seraphim
  45. @Jonathan Revusky

    like dinner guests who show up at somebody’s house empty-handed, no bottle of wine, no nothing.

    There are also people who make big plans, construct a façade, alert the media, and never finish.

    You polluted the Betty Ong article with the ‘reality’-TV drama of the \$10k bet. You did that, and you couldn’t keep the story straight. Still can’t.

    You were the one with a promised payoff. Why would anyone else intervene to aid a disreputable dox pussy?

    You took the story to the 85-yard line, with obscurity, and didn’t finish something you started. Then capped it with a non-apology ‘apology’ to Rurik.

    Anyone here who doesn’t detest you doesn’t know what you did.

    to the table, no?

    Poofter.

  46. @Jonathan Revusky

    I couldn’t follow your notorious egotism right through but maybe for anyone else genuinely interested in understanding what the author is necessarily affirming I asked Ron if he could consider producing or procuring what I sought because, through lack of sleep and an infection I am not feeling up to it right now.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  47. gottlieb says:

    Some folks think the Pyramids in Giza were built as vainglorious tombs for pharaohs. The further one goes back in history the more difficult to understand the lives/cultures of ancestors. When the Aztecs came upon the pyramids at Teotihuacan the great ‘temple’ complex had been abandoned for a thousand years.

    If nothing else this article gives interesting and creative food for thought.

    • Agree: Bugey libre
  48. Ron Unz says:
    @RedpilledAF

    One particular Roman scholar I knew, who is no longer with us, believe by the time of his death that almost all of so-called ancient Greek and Roman history was “fake” and the creation of Renaissance authors and Early Moderns. I have many doubts myself.

    I’m extraordinarily skeptical this sort of nonsense, which had been promoted in the previous articles of this series.

    I actually have a pretty strong scholarly background in Classical History, and during the 1980s I published a number of lengthy articles in some of the leading academic journals:

    https://www.unz.com/author/ron-unz/topic/classical-history/

    The notion that the many millions of words contained in the works of Thucydides, Herodotus, Livy, and numerous other Classical authors were actually all forged by swindlers during the Renaissance seems like absolute and total lunacy to me, roughly the equivalent of believing that the Earth is flat. I should note that Youtube is supposedly filled with Flat Earth videos.

    I’m equally skeptical that the Athenian Parthenon was built by Frankish Crusaders during the Middle Ages.

    The problem with so many “conspiracy people” is that they lack any sense of logic or mental filtering mechanism, falling for the most ridiculous nonsense just as readily as they see through some of the actual “conspiracies” in our recent history.

    This is exactly the reason that the Cass Sunstein strategy of “cognitive inflitration” is so effective, putting out bits of poisoned bait that lots of the conspiracy-types so eagerly injest.

    The underlying cause is that the extreme hostility of the establishment and the MSM entirely deters the vast, vast majority of smart, knowledgeable people from going anywhere near “conspiracy issues,” thereby leaving the field to individuals who are all too often cranks, crackpots, or extremely gullible.

  49. @Ron Unz

    Ron ,
    I am a layman with high curiosity. I regularly listen to historical conferences from official historians on many subject and even read some books (the last one was about the Phoenicians). At that point I can see that history is a fast evolving ‘science’ and on many subjects I hear or read that much of history we have been fed with dates from the XIXth century and is now contradicted and sometime very dramaticaly by genuine scholars.These changes hardly reach the common man who still cling to old datas. It might be worst than ‘ crazy conspiracies’in our undestanding of the world.

    How is it that there would be no flawed datas from the classical history, no revisions to be made? Hasn’t the research evolved since you wrote about that period? Are things really settled once and for all? Aren’t there new investigative methodologies which could help revise our understanding. History is highly politicaly charged and a tool of propaganda changing at different periods. Can we trust the academic world to have real debates? Is challenging the official chronology purely the works of conspiracy theorists? So many certainties have been challenged these last decades, on so many period of history…

    Yes there are a lot of flat earth video on youtube, but a lot of scholars are banned for not following the official, corporate version of what is going on on that present moment on a subject where you and I disagree.

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @Seraphim
  50. Bookish1 says:

    The main reason for all religions is to give us some comfort when we die. Religions guarantee a life after death.

  51. A123 says: • Website
    @Ron Unz

    A theory claiming that Jesus and Muhammad were actually contemporaries seems very doubtful to me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and I don’t see even a sliver of that.

    I concur.

    The author’s words actually point to large numbers of Christians in a wide geographical distribution. For example:

    Christian influence on the formation of Islam is also self-evident. Besides the many Quranic references to Jesus, Muhammad’s canonical biography mentions Jewish Christians known as “Nazarenes” or “Nazoreans”, believers in Christ who remained faithful to Moses’ Torah

    There is a limit to how far Christianity could have spread during and immediately after Jesus life (0-50 AD). The quantity of contacts between Muhammad and Christians in Quran points to a substantial number of Christians that could only exist hundreds of years after the Crucifixion of Jesus.

    Jesus and Muhammad were *not* contemporaries.

    PEACE 😇

    • Agree: Bugey libre
  52. ANON[708] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Genetic makeup is time variant.
    Mutations in DNA occur at a steady pace with fixed regularity which reflects physical time.
    Any archeological findings we can translate or turn into genetic chronology which can be used as time template.
    All findings are correlated with a mutation rate. Ancient Roman and Greek periods were real and in dedignated time

  53. @Ron Unz

    I’m extraordinarily skeptical this sort of nonsense, which had been promoted in the previous articles of this series.

    Argument from incredulity

    Argument from incredulity, also known as argument from personal incredulity, appeal to common sense, or the divine fallacy,[1] is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition must be false because it contradicts one’s personal expectations or beliefs, or is difficult to imagine.

    In any case, to refer to somebody else’s argument as “nonsense”, you have to demonstrate first that it is. And, obviously, since this is the very start of the note, you have not done that yet. So this can be considered a case of the Beg the Question Fallacy.

    In classical rhetoric and logic, begging the question or assuming the conclusion (Latin: petitio principii) is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument’s premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.

    You go on to say:

    I actually have a pretty strong scholarly background in Classical History,

    Right, so you went to school, learned the conventional narrative (timeline) and since this is what all your teachers taught you, that is what must be true. I guess that is mostly an Argument from authority. Well, such arguments are problematic in general, but in this context they are especially dubious. Basically, you are saying that the conventional view (supported by all the various “experts”) is X and therefore an unconventional view (i.e. anything that significantly diverges from X) cannot possibly be true. However, the author of this series of articles has conceded from the get-go that his thesis is extremely unconventional from the outset, so, to trot out the argument that he is wrong precisely because what he is saying is unconventional…

    I suppose, if pushed, you would also argue that, since none of your Ivy League professors even mentioned chronological revisionism, it cannot have any merit. That also may be a variant on the Argument from silence fallacy. In any case, you frequently use variants of this fallacy. You argue that, since there no (or not enough!) sufficiently prominent (by whatever definition) people who uphold theory X, then theory X is not even worth considering.

    during the 1980s I published a number of lengthy articles in some of the leading academic journals:

    Well, this is a blatant example of the Appeal to accomplishment fallacy. You say “I did this” and “I did that” and therefore you must be right.

    There are various variants on this. JP Morgan Chase Bankster Jamie Dimon, when challenged on some statement by a journalist, answered “That’s why I’m rich and you’re not”. Or something to that effect.

    President Lyndon Johnson, in a similar situation, explained that his policy (maybe in Vietnam, I can’t remember) was correct by dropping his pants and whipping out his (huge, apparently) member. I’m pretty sure that this is also an invalid argument, but I could not find it in the Wikipedia list of logical fallacies.

    The notion that the many millions of words contained in the works of Thucydides, Herodotus, Livy, and numerous other Classical authors were actually all forged by swindlers during the Renaissance seems like absolute and total lunacy to me

    Argument from incredulity, again. It seems like lunacy to you, fine. But that does not relieve you of the obligation to actually make an argument.

    I’m equally skeptical that the Athenian Parthenon was built by Frankish Crusaders during the Middle Ages.

    Well, the conventional chronology is that the Parthenon was built in the 5th century B.C. (I just looked it up.) So that would be at least 1500 years before any Frankish crusaders. The chronological revisionism argues that there are seven “phantom centuries”. This means that the Parthenon is closer in time to the crusaders, but still separated by at least 8 centuries. So you’re constructing an argument (such as it is) that demonstrates absolute ignorance of what the position you’re arguing with is.

    Well, all these fallacies sort of tend to overlap somewhat, so this must be in the same family of red herring fallacies as the Straw Man fallacy, which is an oldie but goodie for sure!

    The problem with so many “conspiracy people” is that they lack no sense of logic or…

    Well, Ron, self-observation is very problematic. There needs to be a reality check here. Above, I take the time to point out all the logical fallacies in your discourse leading up to this point. And really, it’s very easy, like shooting fish in a barrel. (Though it’s time consuming…) But if everything you have said up to this point is completely shot through with logical fallacies (and it is!) it is rather cringe-worthy that you then go on to point fingers at other people as “lacking any sense of logic” and so on…

    But, again, you really do have to make an argument and if one strips away all the logical fallacies, there’s nothing there. There’s no argument. Fine, you’re the editor of the publication so in a sense you can do what you want. But I think it is very improper to keep showing up under other people’s articles and say that they lack logic and what they are saying is absurd. And so on.

    Well, to be clear, by all means, say that something is nonsense, fine. You could even be right. But regardless, you are really supposed to produce an argument!

    As for the Cass Sunstein stuff, well… this kind of crap can prevail in a very degraded intellectual environment precisely because people just don’t feel they have to make an argument. It’s just “conspiracy theorist, nya nya” or “anti-vaxxer, nya nya”, trotting out labels that really don’t mean much anyway.

    But what I’m wondering about all this, Ron, is this: do you fail to produce an argument because (a) you are too lazy to do so or (b) because you are not capable of doing it?

    I really don’t know the answer to that one. I would like to know…

    • Agree: Peripatetic Itch
    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  54. @Bookish1

    Religions gives one guidelines to the afterlife and it is rarely confortable ones for sure whatever the religion is. As exemple we can consider the duties of a Nordic trying to reach the Valhala, the ascetism required by many spiritual religions.
    Take care

  55. The sad truth is that in the end after all the scholarly work it will turn out that there is a Creator but it’s not the thing that either the monotheistic groups like Jews, Muslims or Christians believe in nor the pantheon of the pagan cultures…

  56. 7 centuries, eh? Would the number 666 play into this game?

  57. @Robjil

    Yes, we can presume stratigraphic errors are occasionally made. But Heinsohn points out that there is not one site in 35000 Mediterranean area excavations where the sequence early antiquity, late antiquity, early Medieval occurs. Many of these are prime dwelling sites. For this to be due to stratigraphical errors is absurd. To me, Heinsohn’s fundamental argument is unanswerable. Tellingly, it doesn’t seem anyone attempts to answer it. When he asks historians for an example of this sequence, he gets crickets. If forced to decide between archeological evidence and a history book, always go with archeology. It’s less subject to centuries of accumulated errors and groupthink.

    • Replies: @Robjil
  58. @Peripatetic Itch

    He does offer facts and striking coincidences

    lol. Shades of the Loose Change and The God Who Wasn’t Therenincompoops who don’t even bother to research the inconsistencies they note or claim to see if there initial observation might be incorrect.

    But instead of accepting that and realizing its a problem you throw some “you’re just tossing it in the garbage and calling hima conspiracy theorist!” insults.

    This ad hominem is so tiring. Try coming up with some real arguments.

  59. @Bookish1

    The main reason for all religions is to give us some comfort when we die. Religions guarantee a life after death

    .

    Jews do not believe if they die a good Jew they go to heaven, and most ancient religions offered very little or no afterlife reward to adherents. Most ancient religion, ancient Judaism included, were only prescriptions on how to behave in the current world to get earthly rewards. Make the right sacrifice to the right deity, get riches/power/the girl/survive the disease.

    Christianity was a world-changing religion because it became the first major religion to promise a great afterlife to adherents and oriented its adherents to that afterlife, encouraging them to ignore or even celebrate degradations in the earthly realm. And Christ’s blessing could not be bought by a ceremony or spell, only devotion to him and personal penance for spiritual comfort and blessings in the life to come.

  60. @R.G. Camara

    So are you saying that Christianity is a Jewish “psy-op”? Accept your miserable lot in life and all things work out later… much later… like, when you’ve shuttled off this mortal coil?

  61. Anon[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    Yet you published an article by this author who claimed that the current year was actually 1,300 CE. And that the early medieval [ 500 -1,000] roman catholic church invented the years 500 -1,000 CE for some bizarro reason. I assume this author didn’t know that the early RC church continued using the Julian Calendar revised around 100 CE during the reign of Julius Cesear.

    I assume this author is an atheist and against all religions. So write against religions, not these nonsensical creations trying to prove the non existence of God via his revisionism.

    And Petra was built centuries before Islam and the Roman occupation of the area and camels were not used in that area at the time Petra was built and its centuries of being a flourishing city.

  62. I understand there is a grail with magical powers located deep within the caverns of Petra.

    • LOL: iffen
  63. Papa says:

    Maybe you historians should develop new historiographic approaches revolving around epistemic consistency and coherence rather than the purely archeological approach. History is clearly chronologically ontological so the preceding events should always theoretically make narrative sense.
    We can’t keep changing/throwing away historic narrative every new piece of evidence emerges else we’re constantly stuck in the Big Lies territory as a species. The currently popular inductive method of scraps the past and trying to weave a grand narrative from it is convenient, incomplete, and disastrous.

  64. Robjil says:
    @Sparkylyle92

    always go with archeology.

    Yes, do not go with Heinsohn’s theories or anyone’s theories. Go with archeology, I agree. Here is the coin records for Persia. Heinsohn’s theory does not match the findings of the coins.

    https://www.maverickscience.com/wp-content/uploads/Gunnar-Heinsohn-criticism.pdf

    Ancient coinage practices offer an excellent test for Heinsohn’s thesis. As is well- known, archaeologists frequently employ coins in correlating various strata, as distinctive coins from one king or culture serve to provide a secure context for their level of deposit. The practice of minting coins for commerce was first developed by the Lydians in the seventh century BCE. Cyrus the Great, upon conquering Lydia, appears to have begun minting coins of his own in gold and silver shortly thereafter.71 Yet it was the coins issued by Darius himself, depicting a crouching Persian archer on one side, which were to become famous throughout the Persian empire. The gold coins became known as darics, and the silver ones as sigloi.

    Such coins present seemingly insurmountable difficulties for Heinsohn’s reconstruction. For if he is right in identifying Darius with Hammurabi, one would naturally expect to find gold darics galore in Old Babylonian deposits, such as those at Mari. Yet such coins are nowhere attested in Old Babylonian strata, to the best of my knowledge. One might also expect to find gold coins showing the Old Babylonian king in garb typical of that period. Once again, such coins are not to be found. Yet Persian coins were found in Babylon itself.72 How likely is it that Darius only minted coins in his Persian avatar, even when in Babylon

    ?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  65. Metropole says:

    I believe it. The years 300-1000 did not exist. The author has obviously put in a lot of time and effort into proving this.

    However, what I’m more interested in is to skip the years 2000-2300. If we can do this then we’ll avoid a lot of misery and heartbreak.

    If we could wake up tomorrow morning in the year 2300 we would have avoided Armageddon, wars, pestilence, climate change, population reduction, mass immigration, meteor strikes, tsunamis and god knows what horrors.

    We’ll wake up in a new world with peace and prosperity for all, long lives, lots of vacation time, beautiful cities, good weather, space travel and an overall great existence.

    If 700 years be skipped then I’m sure 300 more is also possible.

    • Agree: Robjil, Bugey libre
  66. Robjil says:
    @R.G. Camara

    The Ancient Egyptians believed in an afterlife. That civilization lasted 3000 years.

    Ancient Egyptians loved life, but their life expectancy reached only 40 years old at best. They wanted their lives to continue beyond death, and strongly believed in preservation of the body and providing the deceased with all of the essentials they would need in the afterlife. To them, death was merely a brief disruption in life, and if the funeral practices were followed correctly, the deceased could live without pain in the Fields of Yalu.

    However, a lot went into securing a person’s right into the Fields of Yalu.

    The person’s heart had to be light.

    Good deeds is the way to get an afterlife for Ancient Egyptians. This idea is common to many religions today. Good deeds are good for societies on earth also. So it is a win-win ideology. If Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists or any other modern religions believe such a thing then it is a good thing for society. Whatever beliefs these religions may hold about the sky world it is OK, if they believe in good deeds as the most important thing to do in life.

    The more good deeds a person participated in, the lighter their heart became. Ultimately, upon the person’s death, Anubis weighed their heart against a feather from Ma’at’s (Goddess of Truth and Justice) headdress. If the heart was heavy with bad deeds, it would be devoured by Ammut (soul eater), and the person would not live on in the afterlife. This belief ensured that the ancient Egyptians worked hard at making their souls light

  67. lloyd says: • Website

    The same mind games might be played after a future apocalypse. The nineteenth century never happened. The French revolution was really the Russian revolution. Napoleon and Hitler were the same. World War One was really World War Two. History really does repeat because geography stays the same or psychic forces are at work.

  68. Dumbo says:
    @Ron Unz

    So why do you publish him? Just curious. I’m honestly curious about why Unz publishes people he doesn’t like. It reminds me of that crazy Revusky guy, who I see also appears in the comments here, and whom Ron had a spat with.

    Anyway, personally, I cannot take too seriously the work of a historian who says outlandish things but doesn’t even sign his own name. Does it mean that he doesn’t trust enough what he’s saying? Or perhaps, the topic being Islam, he is cautious? But he didn’t sign his other articles either, and it’s unlikely than any ancient Roman would try to attack him.

    Ok, but it’s not the anonymity itself, there are some anonymous bloggers that I like, it’s the fact that we have no idea who this guy is and he’s saying crazy, unprovable stuff. For all we know, he may be the same person as the “Gay Troll” above. Indeed, Gay Trolls are something never missing on this site.

    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
    , @iffen
  69. anonymous[379] • Disclaimer says:

    Lol!

    Pagan and/or godless vermin trying their damnedest to muddy the origins and history of Islam, and the mighty prophets of the Almighty One.

    The mighty prophets, Abraham, Moses, Jesus (peace be upon them) may have been born in Pagan/Juden societies, but they were always pure monotheists, and would never have subscribed to the accursed pagan idea of “man created in the image-of-god,” implying that “god” is like man, and vice versa. Both Chriztians and Juden repeat this pagan garbage every single day. Isn’t this the very basis of their hyphenation, Judeo-Chriztian?

    While Chriztianity shares the same foundation as Judenism & also borrows heavily from Greek/Hindoo mythology (such as Triple deities), Islam has categorically rejected all of that pagan sewage. The foundation of Islam is rock solid… God is One, and the only One worthy of worship. Period. A billion such deceitful essays will not be able to shake that foundation.

    As you pagan godless morons while away valuable time on earth, worshipping worthless idols and mangods, and also debating such pathetic conjecture… a finite time on earth primarily meant to worship the Almighty One and none else… we true monotheists will joyously go about doing just that, fulfilling that one most important aspect of mankind’s existence.

    The pagan godless Chriztians seem to take pride in quoting the grand statement… the truth shall set you free. Cute, except, their basis of faith is a humongous lie. God cannot be man! The nemesis of this sorry pagan faith is inherent to it.

    For us true monotheists, the ultimate undeniable truth is… There is no [other] God, except God… and thus we have been set free. You pagan morons quote it, while we true monotheists, feel it. 🙂

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  70. raga10 says:
    @Peripatetic Itch

    He does offer facts and striking coincidences. You just tag him with the “conspiracy theorist” label and toss him down the garbage disposal.

    That ad hom is so tiresome. Try coming up with some real arguments.

    Well, my argument is that theories are nice, but from what I’ve read carbon dating is accurate to within a couple of decades for subjects dating within a few thousands of years. If dates provided by carbon dating consistently differed from dates derived from historical accounts by several hundred years I think someone would’ve noticed by now.

    PS. I don’t dispute other aspects of his theories regarding Islam. I only object to the time shift idea, which is actually more prominent in his previous article.

  71. @R.G. Camara

    No, the first were Egyptians, Zoroastrians, Pythagorean-Plato schools, Hindus of Brahmanas and Upanishads, ….

    Not to speak of shamanism of time immemorial….

    [MORE]


    ……….

  72. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    Well…to be honest, you can thank the Saudis for much of this confusion. There used to be plenty of archaeological sites and remains around Islam’s holy cities until they decided to bulldoze everything to make room for things like Burger King outlets and that horrific looking Sauron clock tower. Those sites, had they not been destroyed and uprooted would have provided plenty of ammunition for a relatively straightforward counter argument. Have they carbon dated the relics in the Topkapi yet? That would also be a relatively straightforward counter argument.

    • Replies: @raga10
  73. raga10 says:
    @Anonymous

    Well…to be honest, you can thank the Saudis for much of this confusion. There used to be plenty of archaeological sites and remains around Islam’s holy cities until they decided to bulldoze everything

    Yes, and some say this is not a coincidence – it’s obvious that Saudis gain a lot from status-quo and that’s why they were in such a hurry to destroy any possible evidence that could challenge official islamic narrative.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  74. In reality, the period from the first Roman Emperor Augustus to the traditional Anno Domini 1000 lasted only about 300 years.

    Yea, right. You know, we are not stupid? And why sully Dan Gibson and the rather reasonalbe hypothesis he presents with your fingerprints of crazy?

  75. Svevlad says:
    @gay troll

    There seems to be a massive sociopolitical crisis in the Jewish area, even before the arrival of the Romans, who only made things worse.

    Christianity seems to have started from some sort of economy-related populist revolt against the local Jewish elites who started to disobey the religious law in order to enrich themselves, which the normal people found obviously disagreeable. Michael Hudson claims that Jesus demanded that the tradition of the Jubilee debt forgiveness be restored – I don’t know, but it makes sense.

    But with the Roman conquests, it went from bad to worse, as the local elites became vassals of Rome. This was literal treason, and tensions increased even more – a perfect breeding ground for a movement like Christianity, which perhaps at it’s earliest inception was more of a local, parochial exclusively lower-class Jewish thing, but quickly got dominated by Greeks and turned into the universalist religion it is today.

    It is essentially a “Greek” take on traditional Judaism (we’ll get back to this later). It’s the religion/ideology (religions are ideologies, really) of alienated and exploited poor people regardless of ethnicity. All the iconoclastic destruction of “pagan” stuff was not only a religious thing, but a class vengeance thing. These artifacts were incredibly expensive, and to a dirt poor farmer their mere existence started to feel insulting. Similar to communist destruction of property.

    Islam, obviously, is an Arab take on Judaism, yet a far more martial, militaristic one. Yet unlike Christianity which was a class thing, this is very much an ethnic thing. It absolutely screams “people who got screwed over on something and are now pissed and want to rectify this by any means necessary.” It’s also why Muslims almost form an ethnicity of their own, particularly in diverse diasporas.

    Then we get to Judaism itself. I’m going to go out and stick my neck out and say – modern Islam is closer to original Judaism than modern Judaism, which was basically the elites that fucked up getting butthurt that everyone got their own movement, so they tacked on a bunch of “fuck foreigners but really really much” onto Judaism, bend all the previous things to fit that and called it Judaism. It’s a literal reaction, mostly to Christianity (not only heretical, but also the religion of filthy dirty uppity should-be-slaves!) but also Islam (less heretical, but the religion of a bunch of uneducated hicks from the desert, also should-be-slaves)

  76. Anonymous[171] • Disclaimer says:
    @raga10

    Sure, Saudi is the main spot and has the crucial archaeological sites however it’s not the only place nor buildings the only piece of evidence. The Islamic narrative states that many of the people that form the early Islamic story are buried in a large graveyard in Medina. There are also graves of men generals and governors (who supposedly lived and knew Muhammad) buried in Egypt and Syria and Iran, etc. Now perhaps Muslims won’t let people dig up their graves, but perhaps arrangements could be made to dig near the site and evaluate the evidence from the surrounding soil, foundations, etc. I would imagine that would be one of the first places of interest to explore. Either those people were buried from that generation or those graves are empty or someone else is there, but at least the timeline would coincide or not.

    Technically Muhammad is buried smack dab in the middle of Medina also – and I think a couple of the first caliphs – but I doubt you could do excavation there without starting WW3.

  77. Seraphim says:
    @Bugey libre

    Heinsohn is nothing else than a regurgitation of Fomenko’s thesis, which was proven false. Mr. Guyenot is to blame for reigniting a debate after his ‘arguments’ have been trashed by professional historians (Eric Knibbs).

  78. Ocko says:
    @Seraphim

    Fomenko based his studies on Morozov, a maverik who was imprisoned for his views but had an extraordinary mind.

    While in prison he was allowed to study. He studied history and religion.

    He found later that the Bible had to be written in the 17th to18th century.

    He stumbled over the payment to Judas, the 30 silver coins.

    He contacted historians of geology to figure out when was the silver mined. The Geology historians said that silver was mined the first in Spain, in the 1600’s. AD.

    Before that there were no silver .

    Morozov found that there have been no silver coins before the 17th century.

    He concluded that the Bible must have written in the 17ths or early 18ths centuries.

    As the Quran is later than the Bible, that means the Quran is newer than the Bible.

    Fomenko made more computer simulations to check certain events, also from. The Bible.

    Among them was the event of Christ’s death. There was a sun darkness and an earthquake.

    Those 2 incidents happened only in the 1500s and Constantinople.
    The Bible also mentioned that Jesus could see the Sea from Golgatha. But this is impossible as Jerusalem is about 100 Kilometer (about 65 miles) away from the coast, but it is possible from Constantinople.

    Jerusalem means Eretz Shalom, the place of peace. It was the place where the religious leader resided, which changed as the leaders chose different places. (One of the leaders was a Kharthar who lived in South Eastern France. They were killed by the Pope.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @raga10
  79. History, archeology, carbon dating, Darwin, and Newton with apples and so many atoms buzzing ’round his head, and I can’t forget Einstien, as his theory of relativity crumbles more each year. It all leads me to 1 question? What’s true and what’s not? Everything is theory.
    Think about e=mc2. E is energy, m is mass and c the speed of light. On it’s own the equation seems off. It can’t be proved in a lab. I mean really. Grab some mass, say a rock, spin it around at 186,000 miles per second squared (how do you square light, nothing goes faster … or does something?) and viola you have energy. What kind? Heat? Electricity? Steam? It sounds like bs, all of it. But now I’m getting antisemitic.

  80. Seraphim says:
    @Ocko

    The fact that a fool (actually two) repeats the insane affirmations of another fool doesn’t make them true.
    Where does the ‘Bible’ say that Jesus could see the Sea from ‘Golgatha’ (actually Golgotha- you heard it from a Russian speaking person)? What is a ‘Kharthar?

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  81. Seraphim says:
    @Bugey libre

    Read more books instead of listening to conferences. And drink less Bugey!

  82. Ocko says:

    I also think that the Bible isn’t a history book. For me it is a religious instruction given in allegories.

    Take an example:

    ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”.

    If one knows that ‘the needles was a small gate in Jerusalem. It was infact so small that camels had to be offloaded to go through that gate. If you also know that Jerusalem means Eretz Shalom, the place of peace, then the teaching is : to reach the condition of inner peace you need to get rid of your baggage. You need to be empty, offloaded, not carrying opinions, pet peeves, etc. You need to be present and not prejudiced.

    So what is a ‘rich man’? A Rich Man is somebody who has many ideas, knows already everything, has lots of opinions.

    That sounds much more spiritual,much more from a real spiritual teacher, than taking it literally.

    Or take another parable:

    ‘Sell your cloak and buy a sword’. (He said that at the last supper).
    If you understand that by ‘cloak’ is meant your many personalities/roles: Father/Mother, Boss, Truck driver, intellectual, teacher, owner of a blog etc pp. These are all not yourself. A game you play.

    So then why to buy a sword? Well, how do you make a sword: heat a sword in a fire, banging it with a hammer, cool it in ice cold water. Repeat until any hammering doesn’t change anymore.

    If you sell of your robes/roles you are naked and open, life will heat you, hammer you, shock cool you.

    When you went through it you become a real man/woman, unshakebel and following your path. There is no more lying in you, you are pure. You know the truth.

    Almost everything Jesus said has a deeper meaning.

    Certainly the Bible is not a history book, it never meant to be one. It’s like if you want to study painting and you buy a math book for it.

    If you figure that the Bible doesn’t follow your perceived history, it doesn’t mean it is lying.

    (BTW I am not Christian, having been in a catholic school, I figured it’s not my cup of tea)

    • Replies: @raga10
  83. raga10 says:
    @Ocko

    He contacted historians of geology to figure out when was the silver mined. The Geology historians said that silver was mined the first in Spain, in the 1600’s. AD.

    Before that there were no silver .

    Nonsense! We have silver coins used as currency in Athens around 400 BC. Silver used for these coins was mined near Athens but apparently silver mining started way earlier than that, as far as 3,000 years BC in what is now Turkey.

    Romans used silver coins as well.

  84. some_loon says:
    @Bookish1

    The main reason for all religions is to give us some comfort when we die. Religions guarantee a life after death.

    Really?

    A belief in an afterlife certainly plays a role in this, but it is hardly the main purpose.

    Judaism isn’t real heavy on what happens after death. Buddhism teaches that rebirth is a curse, and that ‘Nibbana’, an extinction or a blowing out, is preferable. Even Christians seem more motivated by a desire to avoid Hell than any desire for Heaven.

    Christianity’s decline in the West has much more to do with a disbelief in Hell than any reduction in desire for what would be infinite pleasure.

  85. I’m a Muslim convert with 4 years seminary in the past to inform me of the Christian viewpoint. From what I’ve learned upon my conversion to Islam this is not far fetched at all. It doesn’t change the basic teachings though. These are uniform between the three Abrahamic paths to all intents and purposes and the Quran acknowledges a common source for all three dispensations.

    The Historical implications are huge though and the hypotheses deserves to be developed and given serious consideration.

  86. @Dumbo

    It is to Ron’s credit that he practices the lost art of free speech and free and open debate. As a scientist I applaud his readiness to entertain intelligently presented counter arguments to what beliefs he may hold at any particular time. It is a sad reflection of the above mentioned loss that anyone could seriously ask the question.

    Why does he give a platform to someone with whose opinion he is not in agreement? How can the truth be established between people who have differing views of it unless they give respectful consideration of the others’ viewpoint? When does censorship benefit the search for truth or science? Dogma and lies require censorship. The truth thrives on challenges. I’m a Muslim and I follow God’s admonition to search for truth. I enjoyed this article and have taken it onboard. I have more reading to do before I incorporate it into my outlook but I’m glad I read this.

    • Replies: @Dumbo
    , @Bill
  87. raga10 says:
    @Ocko

    ‘it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God”.

    If one knows that ‘the needles was a small gate in Jerusalem. It was infact so small that camels had to be offloaded to go through that gate. If you also know that Jerusalem means Eretz Shalom, the place of peace, then the teaching is : to reach the condition of inner peace you need to get rid of your baggage. You need to be empty, offloaded, not carrying opinions, pet peeves, etc. You need to be present and not prejudiced.

    So what is a ‘rich man’? A Rich Man is somebody who has many ideas, knows already everything, has lots of opinions.

    I also remember another explanation that had something to do with fishing and ropes; but whether Jesus was talking about gate, rope or actual needle, the meaning is the same: rich will find it hard to enter the kingdom of god. A ‘rich man’ he was talking about is simply a rich man*, nothing more, nothing less. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. It’s not like Jesus never talked about such earthly matters:

    “It often surprises Christians when they discover just how much the Bible talks about money. In fact there are more than 2300 verses on money, wealth and possessions. Jesus spoke about money roughly 15% of his preaching and 11 out of 39 parables. It was his most talked about topic.”

    * Actually it is a rich person, not specifically a man. Assigning a gender here is an artifact of King James translation, which is why you’ll find newer translations avoid it.

  88. @Bookish1

    Really I don’t think that is it. Religions, I’ve been in a few, all guarantee an orderly society with the best chances for stability. They also usually have excellent direction on how to live healthily and successfully. Success being defined in various ways of course. The afterlife part is more of a core understanding which arises from the question I think quite without religion involved. Many experiences have made us as individuals and collectives question this and the conclusion is made by many it is so, without any religion being invoked. I’m of the opinion our religions are more about being instruction manuals as such to allow us to deal with a cyclical existential threat from extraterrestrials or superterrrestrials (sic) who have ill intent towards us as a species. An excellent example of which may be unfolding for us even now. The prophetic parallels are astounding at the very least.

  89. @Proximaking

    Mr. Unz, can we have a button for “Huh?”

  90. @Seraphim

    Seraphim,

    Don’t you understand he meant Cathare?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  91. @Seraphim

    Seraphim,

    I read more books than most of the people around nowadays. Historical conferences provided by historians in academic context are highly valuable since you get the best of the present datas. That is a fact.

    As to Bugey’s wine, (try this one https://www.vignoblepellerin.com/)… I am not exclusive and delight in sharing with nice people, educated or not, like Humans have been doing for thousand of years (maybe minus 700, LOL). A propos Bugey/history, the domain “La Combe aux rêves ” is doing a very good job, vinificating like Georgian have been doing for a very, very long time…

  92. @obwandiyag

    The dumb dindu mask you put on is slipping.

  93. Dumbo says:

    Islam was created by Jews. That’s all you need to know. They even opened the doors to the moon-worshipping Moors in Spain.

  94. TFMR says:

    A new article by Heinsohn on “the disastrous tenth century: cataclysm and collapse”:
    https://www.academia.edu/51145748/THE_DISASTROUS_TENTH_CENTURY_CATACLYSM_AND_COLLAPSE

  95. Dumbo says:
    @Rabbitnexus

    Yeah, I’m all for free speech, but publishing a lot of random stuff, or mixing good or interesting things with garbage, tends to dilute the general message. My problem with UR is that sometimes it doesn’t seem to have a focus, sometimes it publishes interesting things, but also a lot of random, useless stuff. Not all of what’s published here is, by any means, “things excluded by the media”. Some just parrot the media lines.

    Now, I haven’t read this particular text, although I read two of his previous articles by the same anonymous author, who were very unconvincing. So, not a fan. And I tend to like outlandish “everything is fake” conspiracy theories. I like Miles Mathis, for instance. Even though he’s verboten here, for some reason.

  96. iffen says:
    @Dumbo

    It reminds me of that crazy Revusky guy, who I see also appears in the comments here, and whom Ron had a spat with.

    Revusky is one of many R. Unz sockpuppets.

    • Troll: Raches
    • Replies: @Raches
  97. anonymous[356] • Disclaimer says:

    Check out the moral cesspool of a civilisation whose godmen are some of the most evil on earth.

    https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/05/europe/france-catholic-church-abuse-report-intl/index.html

  98. @anonymous

    – Worship of meteorites was widespread in the whilom Fertile Crescent
    (usually in the course of some Near Eastern fertility cult; some passages
    in the Old Testament especially regarding Midian can be read as such).

    The Romans in the course of their campaigns acquired quite a collection
    (unfortunately lost to us) the most important of which was the Stone
    of the Kybele of Edessa that is not, as the author insinuates, the one in Mecca.

  99. @Wizard of Oz

    I asked Ron if he could consider producing or procuring what I sought because, through lack of sleep and an infection I am not feeling up to it right now.

    When I referred to your “not ever bringing anything to the table”, I was not referring to anything recent, attributable to some recent lack of sleep or minor ailment. I was characterizing a long-term issue. Your participation on this site dates back at least 5 years and you simply never contribute anything of substance to any discussion.

    Never.

    To the extent that you ever try to bring any information into a conversation, it’s always just worthless crap like: “I saw a documentary on Australian TV and…”

    To make matters worse, you never even provide a link to the material in question, so nobody can see what you’re even talking about. (Assuming they wanted to waste their time by doing so…)

    In general, you continually insert yourself into discussions about things like 9/11 and it is very obvious that, in 5 years (at least!) you never educated yourself even minimally about the topic. You don’t even know what the broad lines of debate are.

    So, this nonsense that you are not doing the work yourself, that you suggest that Ron Unz should do, specifically because of some lack of sleep or something in the last week…. this is absurd!

    This is the way you always behave!

    So, again, it’s like somebody who always shows up empty-handed to whatever dinner party, and after showing up empty-handed every week since any body can remember, they give the excuse that today specifically they were pressed for time and couldn’t pick up a bottle of wine on the way over. Uhh, yeah… right…

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  100. Bill says:
    @Rabbitnexus

    Editorial judgement is not contrary to free speech. Entertaining every argument offered up is a recipe for polluting your mind and knowing nothing. And, yes, this means that, far from being a fallacy, appeal to authority is a mandatory precondition to coherent thought.

  101. And who keeps on falsifying all the C14 data on organic material from Antiquity, the dendrochronology, even the data on phylogeny of viruses?
    IT’S A JEWISH CONSPIRACY! ALL SCIENTISTS ARE JEWS!
    Who turned Latin into Italian and Spanish, Anglo-Saxon into English etc. with a finger snap?
    IT’S A JEWISH CONSPIRACY! ALL SCHOLARS ARE JEWS!
    Who faked the entire recorded history of China down to the recording of the embassy of “An Tun” (Antoninus) to China in 150 AD?
    IT’S A JEWISH CONSPIRACY! ALL CHINESE ARE JEWS!
    Oh, and don’t forget…
    THERE IS NO SUN! ALL STARS ARE JEWS!
    You guys can be really amusing with your little one-track minds, but now kindly please crawl back under the stones from which you have emerged.

    • Replies: @Robjil
    , @some_loon
  102. @Seraphim

    I think that by listening to conferences BL gets a better idea of the current state of knowledge regarding history. It takes time for this information to filter down into books and most books just repeat much of the same things.

    I also think that there is some validity to trying to investigate and explain the “missing centuries” of the so-called Dark Ages. So we are supposed to accept that all this knowledge from the classical period was somehow lost to the Europeans until it was rediscovered among the Arabs so much later. That does not seem to me as a rational explanation. But then I suppose it is possible to forget old knowledge and know how, sort of like NASA forgetting how to get to the moon and accidentally destroying all the original documentation and films, and is now unable, for some reason, to reinvent the wheel so to speak, but there are no missing decades (or will it be centuries, if ever?) between the last human moon landing and whenever the next one will be.

    • Thanks: Bugey libre
  103. Robjil says:
    @Gaylord of Germany

    THERE IS NO SUN! ALL STARS ARE JEWS!

    Heinsohn would agree with that theme. Look at his passions. He is a Jewish Supremacist worshiper. His “studies” must have this focus on mind.

    https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii56/articles/goran-therborn-nato-s-demographer.pdf

    In the 1980s, following in the footsteps of another agile mind gone astray, the psy- chiatrist Immanuel Velikovsky, Heinsohn turned his attention to the ancient world, re-shuffling the established histories of Egypt and Israel to give the latter chronological precedence.

    In fact, for all his admiration of the Pentagon, Heinsohn’s first inter- national love seems to be Israel, or more deeply Judaism, seen by him as an ethical example. (This is not an expression of any ethno-religious chau- vinism, but an ideological choice

    He launches a bitter attack on European critics of the post-1967 West Bank settlements, noteworthy since he has been charged with leading an institute of genocide research. Yet the well-protected settler movement would surely qualify for that term under the broad definition given to it by the UN after World War Two that included population removal by deportation and harassment.

    The book was written in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, of which Heinsohn was an ardent supporter, and contains its share of sombre meditations on ‘genocidal dictatorships’ and ‘weapons of mass destruction’. In recent interventions, his perspective has become more policy-oriented— perhaps due to the fact that, on the basis of Söhne und Weltmacht, he is now a frequent guest speaker at the German Ministry of the Interior, Intelligence Service (bnd) and nato,

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  104. some_loon says:
    @Gaylord of Germany

    Who faked the entire recorded history of China down to the recording of the embassy of “An Tun” (Antoninus) to China in 150 AD?

    The rest of your post is mostly trolling, but this is quite a good question for the author of the article.

    This date is just prior to the alleged seven phantom centuries, and I would think that the Chinese have their own chronology of events since then.

    It is not enough to accuse Jesuits of corrupting the record to make it consistent with Western timelines.

    Yet another article in the ‘very informative, yet unpersuasive’ category.

    The best use these sorts of articles, or so I have found, is to explore one’s own credulity (or stubbornness) and to see how little each of us know about these things. Some are convinced they know enough to refute the author’s claims. Perhaps some of them are right.

    Still a fun read (both article and comments).

  105. JoeFour says:

    For those interested in the revisionist critique of conventional historical chronology, here’s a link providing a good summary of, and excerpts from, the work of Fomenko and Nosovskiy:

    https://www.stolenhistory.org/articles/the-new-chronology-by-fomenko-and-nosovskiy.68/

    • Thanks: Commentator Mike
  106. @Robjil

    I suppose one should separate one’s science from one’s politics. I’m sure there are many academicians who were right and honest in their scientific work but whose politics were repugnant. This Heinsohn won’t be the first one.

  107. Faisal says:
    @Wallyrlz

    Dear Wallyrlz,

    Appreciated reading your comment, because I think it would be worthwhile to engage with some of the points that you mention. As a Muslim, I was not aware of some of the points you mention, and would be curious to know how you know this information?

    Your points for Muslims as follows can perhaps have easier explanations then you might think:

    Point 1: How many Arabs realize that the early Muslims used to pray towards Petra? What you may not realize is that the early Muslims used to pray to Jerusalem. This is known by Arabs and Muslims alike, and is also clearly in the Quran. However, you might be mistaking this because from Mecca the direction to Jerusalem would be roughly the same as praying to Petra.

    Point 2: How many of them realize that Muhammad stole the word allah from a pagan moon god? Very interesting. Then by the same token how many Christians realize that Jesus stole the same word from a pagan moon god. Yes, Jesus also called God Allah. Also, Arab Christians today call god in their churches Allah.

    How many Arabs realize that many of the Islamic beliefs and practices such as halal slaughter, hajj, and aushura are stolen from either Christianity, Judaism or Paganism? I think most Muslims realize this but you provide one possible explanation. the other explanation why beliefs and practices overlap (just as plausible) is because the religion has always been one, and all the Prophets have brought the same message. Would you say that Jesus stole practices/beliefs from the Moses, or that the Moses stole the practices/beliefs of Abraham, who stole the practice beliefs of Noah?

    Then, the overlap could perhaps be because there is only one True God, and he has sent his prophets with the one truth over time to humanity on the tongue of his choosen emissaries (adjusted in details as needed for the times but retaining the same basic core). Could be?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  108. Anonymous[349] • Disclaimer says:
    @Faisal

    Good points about the phenomenon of overlapping beliefs and practices.

    One thing that intrigued me was when I saw that the Buddhist monks wear a garb similar to Muslim pilgrims.
    Now it could be a sign that this was copied or plagiarized or could be an indication of similar “proto-origins” like you mentioned.

    The one thing though is that secular academic studies basically start from an initial point of “religious/spiritual claims cannot be verified or are untrue; now let’s explain the phenomenon by some other means.” Assuming God or an angel or a demon spoke to someone or that their spirit transcended some astral plane is a non-starter.

    One has to pick one’s a priori assumptions and usually conclusions roll downhill from there. I don’t know how one escapes from this. People who convert to a religion or leave it altogether choose to adopt a completely opposite frame of reference from the top down.

  109. Hmm … like others I struggled to read/make sense of much of this dissertation, one that makes the Julian/Gregorian Calendar issue into child’s play.
    That incited riots about a few days … now, 700 years …

    Just the same, an interesting thesis … first time for me to see it …
    Probable to read the rest of the material in FMR.

  110. babu says:

    Jesus was a Black skinned Negro.

  111. Anonymous[307] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robjil

    Not just archaeology, I’m a bit surprised that researchers would simply discount records of events through astronomy.

    I remember when the recent solar eclipse happened (somewhere in the US), I looked up the history of solar eclipses at NASA and there is a database of locations and when they occurred and if they were mentioned in historical sources.
    https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEhistory.html

    One that seems pertinent to the discussion is one that actually occurred across Arabia and in the year 632. You can see the projected path here:
    https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEplot/SE0632Jan27A.pdf

    NASA even has a note from Wiki attached to it:
    Death of Mohammad’s Son Ibrahim
    “When his beloved son Ibrahim died, an eclipse occurred, and rumours of God’s personal condolence quickly arose.”
    – Prayers of Muhammad

    Clicking further on the wiki entry states that this is from some hadith in Bukhari, which I think the Muslims use for tracking early history.

    Which begs the question, since the Arabs had a distinct lunar-based calendar that was completely disconnected with Rome (kind of like the Chinese having a completely separate calendar system); if the Muslim sources actually reported that eclipse event accurately (an event that one can use calculations to literally wind back a clock to get a pretty precise reading), then how can one propose missing centuries?

    In fact, if the claim is that the Abbasids wrote that into the early narrative from centuries past; how exactly? Did they have the means to calculate lunar trajectories and walk them backwards to coincide with the proposed lifetime of a made up Arab personality? Or did they borrow the knowledge of the eclipse from some other source? If so, where else was this event recorded that the Abbasids could get their hands on it to manipulate?

    • Thanks: Robjil
    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  112. Seraphim says:
    @Bugey libre

    Of course I did understand that he meant the Cathars, the more that I’ve been several times in the ‘pays cathare’ (even developing a taste for ‘Domaine Cathare’ wines, like ‘Inquisition’).
    The question is whether he did. Getting consecrated names wrongly means that you don’t know what you are talking about. History operates with clear and distinct ideas (and ‘appellations’). It is not poetry you entertain people with tall stories in ‘verlan’ over a glass (or more) of wine like the troubadours, giving free reign to imagination.

    • Replies: @Bugey libre
  113. @Anonymous

    Fomenko based his critique of Scalingerian historical chronology precisely on astronomical data.

    All solar, lunar eclipses mentioned in chronicles presumed to be written before XVI century could not and did not take place at the very time and exact location reported to us by the ancient authors thereof. Learned chroniclers did like so much to stress the importance of the event with some phenomena in the sky. Either they lied or were wrong, or both. Verdict: the celestial events took place some other time and some other place or there was nothing spectacular in the sky at that very moment.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  114. @Jonathan Revusky

    I see your reply because it has turned up in mu Inbox but, though I waste a lot of time I shall not read more than a few lines since I Kong since decided that your ideas and mental processes were a threat to sanity – exaggerating slightly.. (It’s a shame that that delightful story teller Linh Dinh can’t see you as you are). There is IMO very rarely anything interesting or worthwhile to be learned from 90+% of UR commenters but I still can find something in conversation which may or may not lead to enlightenment or action for or by oneself or others. There are occasionally interesting things to be added to one’s mental furniture from UR threads I find as the occasional bonus. I don’t know why you participate. Do you?

  115. Anonymous[422] • Disclaimer says:
    @Commentator Mike

    ALL solar, lunar eclipses mentioned in chronicles presumed to be written before XVI century COULD NOT and DIS NOT take place at the very time and exact location reported to us by the ancient authors thereof.

    The problem with hedging one’s bet on such an absolutist position is that it is readily refuted by just one example and harms the claimant’s credibility.

    Let’s cover that example of the solar eclipse of 632 as a counter to Fomenko.

    Unless you are a flat-earther or believe NASA is lying about the cited example, we have evidence (based on calculations of solar, lunar and earth’s orbits and trajectories that can be rewound to get us everything from when the eclipse occurred to where it was visible along the curvature of the earth) that there was a solar eclipse in the year 632 that was readily visible to Arabs living in the middle of Arabia near either of Islam’s claimed holy cities. In a desert environment with little cloud cover, it is even more likely to be noticed and visible than in a place like Europe. So far so good?

    Now, the Arabs report that an important figure lived approximately between 560 to 640 in the middle of Arabia (towards the Red Sea). Furthermore, they report some important event took place near the later part of his life (the event is insignificant – it could be a marriage or death/birth of a child or a victory/defeat in battle) that coincided with a solar eclipse visible in that area near the time calculated by NASA for the same phenomenon.

    One basic conclusion is that the Arabs more or less accurately reported this event through oral and or written transmission; Fomenko is refuted.

    Let’s say, “nope – the Abbasids made up a mythical/legendary Arab figure to legitimize their rule and threw in a solar eclipse to spice it up”.**

    OK, well that wiki article says the report is by Bukhari who reportedly lived at the time of the Abbasids and died in the late 9th century. Let’s say they used him to spread the propaganda about this legendary Arab predecessor that they claim lived around 560 to 640. So how did they throw in a story that predicted the solar eclipse event fairly competently as far as location and timing? If they were just making it up, why wasn’t it wildly off by 50 years or so? Are we saying they had the science to accurately calculate solar eclipses backwards based on knowledge of celestial orbits? If so, that is far more complicated than Fomenko gives anyone credit for at the time; Fomenko is refuted.

    Let’s say the Abbasids weren’t able to calculate the solar eclipse but accurately reported the timing and location in their mythology by plagiarizing from some other civilization’s records. First off, is there evidence for this recorded in some other records in India or Egypt or whatever? Second, let’s say it is there – OK, fine, but that just means the Abbasids stole the data from someone else who recorded it accurately; again, Fomenko is refuted.

    No matter how you analyze the event, Fomenko’s absolutist (and I would say dogmatic) position fails to explain what’s going on. He should have instead given himself wiggle room and stated that “many” reports or “most” reports of eclipses from that time are inaccurate.

    **There is another weird (somewhat incidental) aspect about this particular story jiving with the idea of the Abbasids making it up. If I was going to throw in a story about an eclipse happening at the time of a legendary figure I was creating a myth around, I would say something like, “he died and there was a solar eclipse and all the people knew it was God telling them he was special and even the sun was paying a moment of silence for him”. Pretty straightforward, right?

    But the eclipse hadith cited in wiki says other people were saying that the sun was eclipsing for his dead son, but then he tells them – no, the sun and moon do NOT eclipse for anyone dying. That is rather anticlimactic and doesn’t really make for good legend-making. 🤦‍♂️

    • Agree: Metropole
    • Replies: @Metropole
  116. raga10 says:

    According to Heinsohn, the standard view of the first millennium C.E. is an arbitrary construct that doesn’t stand up to modern scientific archeological evidence. It is too long by some 700 phantom years. In reality, the period from the first Roman Emperor Augustus to the traditional Anno Domini 1000 lasted only about 300 years.

    In 79AD eruption of Vesuvius wiped out Pompei – event that we place at 79AD thanks to historical record, in particular writings of one Pliny the Younger. By the standard chronology, 79AD was… let me get my calculator… 1942 years ago.

    But if period from the first Roman Emperor Augustus to the traditional Anno Domini 1000 lasted only about 300 years, then explosion actually took place 1942-700= 1242 years ago.

    Not so, says argon dating technique – it placed the event at “1925 years ago”, according to the article that is itself dated from 1997, which would mean 1953 years ago from now.

    The difference between conventional historical dating and argon dating is 11 years, there is no 700 years unaccounted for.

    Conclusion: first millennium was exactly as long as it was supposed to be: 1000 years long.

    source: https://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/97legacy/pompeii.html

    • Thanks: Robjil
    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  117. @Seraphim

    Maybe he doesn’t know a lot about the “purs”, les “bons hommes” or “les bonnes femmes” or “Les pauvres de Lyon”… But it is a fact that the ”Cathare” appelation had been given to them by their theological and political opponents. As to the spelling orthodoxy, well, before the XIXth century it didn’t matter that much in our country since most of the people were talking their local ‘patois’ and the ‘orthographie’ hadn’t really been settled. Clear appelations are not always that ‘clear’ when one studies (even like me as a layman) history and very often their are questions of how to spell or pronounce things (in that thread, Bacca, Mecqua for instance…)

    The subject of Cathare illustrates what we have been discussing before, that is the importance of the latest datas. I have been reading books on the subject 20 years ago that were more phantasizing about the Cathares (like Nelly’s or La revue d’étude Cathare) than genuine history. That even led to Otto Rahn’s mission for the silly Third Reich.

    I’d be curious to try “Domaine Cathare” since it is a 100% malbec, a grape variety that I know and appreciate from having lived close to Cahors, a wine which must be made with malbec. Don’t worry for me, I don’t drink that much. First I practice martial art and qi gong, then I do only use a bike to move around and I mainly drink organic or natural wine which are to expensive to be an abuser with(lol).

    Many historians of ‘old days’ were mainly using imagination since they often had (and still have) very few items or no faked written documents to buid their understanding of past time.
    Maybe, if you are not as psychorigid as you sometime appear to be, it would be a pleasure sharing a malbec or a mondeuse or a poulsard or whatever with you in real life. The best people are, according to me those with whom we take pleasure disagreeing or agreeing with.

    Beware, cher concitoyen, it might indeed be rather hazardous to fly while drinking to much for a… celestial winged creature.

    Respect

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  118. @raga10

    I tried to look into this, since I had never heard of argon-argon dating, only C-14. One thing about this that made me wonder is the statement on the Wikipedia page that this method does not provide the absolute age of a sample, but only a relative age — i.e. relative to some other sample of which the age is known.

    In fact, the wiki page states quite explicitly that the method provides relative dating only and goes on to say:

    The 40Ar/39Ar method only measures relative dates. In order for an age to be calculated by the 40Ar/39Ar technique, the J parameter must be determined by irradiating the unknown sample along with a sample of known age for a standard. Because this (primary) standard ultimately cannot be determined by 40Ar/39Ar, it must be first determined by another dating method. The method most commonly used to date the primary standard is the conventional K/Ar technique.[1] An alternative method of calibrating the used standard is astronomical tuning (also known as orbital tuning), which arrives at a slightly different age.[2]

    So the question is what other sample 0f known age was used to calibrate the measurement in this case, and how was the age of the other sample known. I mean, if you’re calibrating against a sample of “known age” but, in fact, you’re just as wrong about the age of that baseline sample, then…

    So, if the method is only dating things relative to one another… That said, it looks like this dating method could be very useful in terms of resolving these questions. If you have two samples that are supposed to be 1000 years apart but the relative dating shows that they are only 300 years apart. But, from my reading on this (and I concede from the start that I am no expert!) it seems that the method only can provide relative ages, not absolute age, so it is not clear to me that the information provided actually does resolve this question.

    • Replies: @raga10
  119. Brillant!
    These words are exactly my thoughts and fortify my arguments. I can add to that my theory of the “Sameness Of The Phoenixians And The Vikings”! Based on the facts that they were both excellent seafarers, they had similar boats, both used Runes, both had nordic DNA and the Vikings appeared some centuries (7?) after the Phoenixians disappeared.
    Also do i believe that the publication of the Talmud is not by accident contemporary to the bloody christianisation of the German people by “Roman” priests.
    PS: a very nice read to prehistory is Frenzolf Schmidt’s 1931 Masterpiece “Urtexte der Ersten Göttlichen Offenbarung – Die Atta=lant=ische Urbibel – Das Goldene Buch der Menschheit”
    The Golden Book of Mankind Starts 85.000 Sears ago and connects and compares ancient scriptures in regards to Atlantis and its capital Papylon and four cataclysm that changed earth’s face and shook Mankind ever since. Adding to that is the story of the destruction of the Aryan culture by the people of the Udumu and the Chandals that worshipped the animalgod Jawia..

  120. My original thought on the Vikings originated in playing with the german words „Wikinger” and the abstraction of „Phönizier” to „Phöniker”. Phoeniker – Wikinger – consonant shift was common then.

  121. Che Guava says:
    @anyone with a brain

    None of the Asia chronologies provide any means for cross-checking this nonsense.

    Japan does have a missing 800 or so years in the version of history that some extreme nationalists pretend to believe, but re. the years from abt. 400 B.C. to abt. 400 A.D., western equivalent.

    No relevance to this bullshit.

    The non-existent eight centuries were simply invented in a vain attempt to match China’s antiquity.

    Both the few Chinese accounts of pre-Japan and archaeology make it clear that the chronology to say ‘really ancient’ is plainly fake.

    So not at all comparable to this absurd 230=850 or 930, or whatever, which is pure bullshit with no clear intention.

    The time-line of Roman popes and of patriarchs in the other centres is pretty clear.

    Was Peter the first bishop of Rome? I have no idea and tend to doubt it, but did Clement exist? Well, he was a writer, perhaps he didn’t really exist as bishop of Rome, but there is no good argument for saying that.

    After that, there is a history of reign dates that makes the ‘missing seven centuries’ idea pure rubbish.

    The same applies to the history of rulers in all of Europe, east and west. The eastern Roman Empire does not have a seven-century gap.

    The parallel period in China also has no such gap.

  122. This is pure nonsense, as bad as the people who claim that Captain Kirk was just a fictional character – even though we have hours and hours on him on video and even video of him using his civilian name, Shatner!

    If Star Trek was nothing but propaganda for Cold War America, then how come they didn’t say that? We’re supposed to believe in a giant conspiracy, lasting decades, where a bunch of actors and scriptwriters and cameramen all engaged in a giant conspiracy?

    Why would anyone do such a thing? It’s absurd.

    Next you’ll tell us that Joseph Smith didn’t really find the Golden Plates and that the Wizard Gandalph was just a “myth.”

    Harry Potter is real – all you doubters are just upset you’re muggles!

    • LOL: some_loon
  123. raga10 says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    So the question is what other sample 0f known age was used to calibrate the measurement in this case, and how was the age of the other sample known. I mean, if you’re calibrating against a sample of “known age” but, in fact, you’re just as wrong about the age of that baseline sample, then…

    I’m no expert either so I can’t give you a definitive answer, but I have some thoughts:

    I think it is worth stressing that this technique is used for estimating ages of rocks – its users are interested in geology, not history. As such they would have no particular historical axe to grind, which is why I thought this was especially informative case.

    As for that J-factor: it seems like they use the more standard K-Ar technique for calibration. What they are NOT doing is using historical data for calibration because again: this is geology, not history. So even if their calibration is off, the error is not affected by, or related to whatever dating shenanigans historians might be playing.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  124. Seraphim says:
    @Bugey libre

    Nelli is a little ”passé” (1972). There are many new studies: Michel Roquebert, Histoire des Cathars (‘une synthèse exhaustive de trois siècles dramatiques et flamboyants. La référence indispensable’!), 2002 (picked in a bookshop in Toulouse). Rahn, of course is utter BS.
    You may be surprised but I am a ‘concitoyen’ only in a larger European sense, but I visit France on a regular basis. A little ironically perhaps, my roots are in the regions where ‘Bogomilism’ sprang from.
    But I wouldn’t mind sharing with you whatever you like, I am not ‘psychorigid’ when it comes to wine. But at the moment flying from where I live to visit my Occitan friends is impossible. But we find all varieties of French wines in the bottle-shops.
    Santé.

  125. Raches says: • Website
    @iffen

    Revusky is one of many R. Unz sockpuppets.

    Oh, noes!  I am so sad to learn that Mr. Unz wants me to kill myself, as he told me in his “Revusky” guise.

    But wait!  I am allegedly Mr. Unz’s sockpuppet, according to “Intelligent Dasein”, “Je Suis Omar Mateen”, and other illustrious personages.  And in his “Raches” guise, Mr. Unz declared himself to be a right-to-die absolutist!

    If \({Unz}_{Revusky}\) tells \({Unz}_{Raches}\) to kill himself, does that mean that Mr. Unz is suicidal? :-(

    And “Raches”-Unz has admitted that he is of the Oberjuden, with Jewish-conspiracy plans to exterminate all of his billions of sockpuppets with killer vaccines!  Gevalt, gevalt, it’s a sockpuppet Holocaust. ®

  126. @Raches

    LOL! (And here I’m laughing with you, not against you).

    • LOL: Raches
  127. Personally, I love these articles. Seems pretty obvious that someone made up 700 extra years and then conveniently labeled a huge swath of history to be the “dark ages” so that nobody has to explain what happened. So… long story short: Jesus, Mohammed, and Gengis Khan all walk into a bar…

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  128. @Raches

    Well, as regards my earlier suggestion that you blow your brains out by shoving a gun up your ass and pulling the trigger, I do have to admit that this is a radical (though quite definitive!) solution to your various problems. So it does not surprise me that you disregard this friendly advice.

    Given that you insist on preserving your miserable existence, I would now suggest that you schedule a visit with an opthalmologist. Having perused your blog, you definitely seem to have an “I” problem.

  129. Personne says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Jesus Christ Ron, quit arguing with yourself and get some sleep.

    • LOL: Jonathan Revusky
  130. These ideas are very fascinating and worthy of further discussion and analysis. It is unfortunate that the past is always a tool for hustlers, grifters and haters of the present to amass power by beguiling the guileless and enraging the witless.
    I was going to say that we should approach these matters dispassionately as though we were landing on some distant planet and analyzing fragments of long abandoned structures half buried in shifting desert sands. But the way The Authorities treat ambiguous and tantalizing anomolies found in Mars rover photos renders that whole idea moot. Humans can’t just do detective work on anything without it being instantly propagandized. And I’m doing it right now…

  131. @Magic Dirt

    I concur.

    History is a set of lies agreed upon – Napoleon

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
  132. @Jonathan Revusky

    As I’ve started quoting Napoleon, here’s another apposite one:

    The fool has one great advantage over a man of sense; he is always satisfied with himself

  133. Metropole says:
    @Anonymous

    Here’s the information on the solar eclipse that happened in January 632 AD during the time of the Prophet from NASA’s website. There’s only a discrepancy of five days between dates from Islamic sources and NASA.

    https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEplot/SE0632Jan27A.pdf

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Von Rho
  134. Metropole says:

    Here’s NASA’s list of historical solar eclipses, tied to reported historical events.

    https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEhistory.html

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  135. Anonymous[347] • Disclaimer says:
    @Metropole

    That’s what I was getting at. Solar eclipses are rare events. It is irrelevant whether one believes that a prophet was walking around or that he had a son that died or whatever. The point is that the Arab record for this event (even if it just got the year correct) is spectacularly accurate.

    Let’s say I lived in China in the same time frame (9-10th century) and I wanted to make up a mythical figure from the Philippines who was a god-emperor from 300 years ago and a solar eclipse happened in his lifetime when he came down from a “mountain of enlightenment”. How would I possibly go about figuring out (given contemporaneous resources) and getting right a solar eclipse that is visible from the Philippines within a range of even ten years of when I say it happened?

  136. @raga10

    What they are NOT doing is using historical data for calibration because again: this is geology, not history.

    Well, I have to admit that I don’t really understand the issues on the argon-argon data very well at all. I had never heard of it before you brought it up. But that said, here is some text taken from the article you linked:

    According to the Roman historian Pliny the Younger, Vesuvius erupted in the early afternoon of Aug. 24, 1,918 years ago, destroying Pompeii, Herculaneum and other Roman cities.

    The certainty of the date tempted the team to test the ability of the argon-argon dating technique to establish the age of recent historic events.

    I’m not sure how to parse that second sentence. To me, it sounds like, rather than verifying the conventional chronology via this method, they are taking the conventional chronology as a given and then deducing the age of other things relative to that. That’s what it sounds like to me.

    Generally speaking, I don’t know what to think about this because, after reading the previous articles in the series, I went and looked at some of Heinsohn’s writings. Heinsohn could be right or wrong, like anybody, but he really does look like a serious scholar. To me, it would be quite surprising if somebody like that staked so much of his scholarly reputation on something that is so easily debunked.

    In the other branch of this discussion, there is this mention of the solar eclipse. I guess it’s true that a total eclipse of the sun is quite rare, like once a century at any given location, but partial eclipses are much more frequent. But more generally, that some ancient writings say that there was some signs from the heavens or other that marked some very important occurrence…

    For me, the overall problem is that there really do seem to be some problems with the historical record, certainly in Western Europe. (I am really quite unfamiliar with the Arab/Islamic timeline.) There are a bunch of centuries for which there just doesn’t seem to be much solid there. In fact, what there mostly seems to be is a bunch of storytelling, things like the Arthurian legends, for which there is no archaeological or historical record. How much real history is there between the end of Roman Britain and the Norman conquest?

    I live in Spain and the nearly 8 century long reconquista, the more one seriously thinks about it, is really rather strange. The Muslims and Christians were fighting one another for nearly 800 years?

    Really?

    Consider the 30 Years’ War in Northern Europe between Catholics and Prostestants. That was from 1618 to 1648 and was utterly devastating. Parts of Germany lost 50% of their population. One infers that, after 30 years of this, they reached a point where this was just too painful and they had to stop!

    So think about this. If that 30-year religious war was on the same time scale as the Spanish reconquista, they would still be fighting now! Not only that, they would have only just passed the halfway point and still have a few centuries left to go!

    So, to think that this timeline could be somewhat padded is not, at least prima facie so crazy, is it? But that is just one example. There seem to be similar problems with the timeline in other European countries. Whatever is true is true finally, but to take the stance, like Ron Unz does, that to question any of this is just absurd and nonsensical…

    Well, Unz thinks that questioning the establishment line on these COVID vaccines is just crazy too. All the establishment people say X so X must be true… Yeah, right…

    Increasingly, it seems to me that just about everything needs to be questioned!

    • Agree: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @raga10
    , @Seraphim
  137. Half-Jap says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    I’m not sure what the formal name of this fallacy is. It might be the same as what the above-linked page refers to as Argument from self-knowing. Or it’s related to that anyway. I myself would just call it the “The world exists in my head” fallacy. You cannot conceive of something being true, or it sounds wrong… therefore it cannot be true. As I recall, this was your main “argument” in the moon landing debate of a couple of years ago. However, it’s not really an argument. In fact, it is a well known logical fallacy.

    I also struggle to rub enough brain cells together to remember the fallacy, but at least the phenomenon is labelled as cognitive dissonance. Ever since critical thinking happened in my mid-teens, haven’t met a person without it on some matter. It feels good to have it shattered, as I am a gratuitous masochist, but most simply avoid/dismiss and/or get triggered by the matter presented. The triggered dismissal is the best intellectual comedy.

    What concerns me most is the catastrophe cycle. FMR is but one of many that are skeptical of received knowledge of our past.

  138. Anonymous[285] • Disclaimer says:
    @Metropole

    Well, NASA is to be trusted. After all, is there anything about which they didn’t lie?

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
  139. I have been reading the author as well as Heinsohn.
    Looks interesting to me and I´ll keep reading. I strongly suggest to everyone interested in Heinsohn´s theory to like really really read the ancient Mexican cultures, from the aztecs to the teotihuacans, mayans, etc. EVERYTHING is there in a massive scale. Sacrifices, representations of the flood, a holy serpent, the creation and destruction of the worlds, the aztec-origin from a cave in an island, etc. The holy city of Teotihuacan was suddenly depopulated during the Xth century, without a well-known reason, and that is widely known in the field studies. So when I read Heinsohn´s theory, I kinda instinctively agree with them, although there´s still much to study. Regards

  140. raga10 says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    To me, it sounds like, rather than verifying the conventional chronology via this method, they are taking the conventional chronology as a given and then deducing the age of other things relative to that. That’s what it sounds like to me.

    I think you are partially right, but that doesn’t invalidate their finding. Again, remember they are geologists. They did not set out to verify the conventional dating of this eruption – their goal was to demonstrate their measuring technique is accurate. The fact it happens to confirm standard chronology is a byproduct of their test we can use for our purposes, but I repeat, this was not their intention.

    Of course it is possible they were fudging their data in order to make their measurement agree with standard chronology, but if you want to accuse them of that, you’ll need to have evidence.

    • Replies: @raga10
  141. raga10 says:
    @raga10

    …. and I doubt they would fall for the trap of circular logic of “we know this eruption happen this many years ago so we calibrate our base at this many years”. They are scientists after all, give them some credit!

    Anyway if that’s how calibration worked, this technique would be completely useless in the first place.

  142. Seraphim says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    The first thing you should question is your own power of reasoning. All that glitters is not gold. Not everything that pleases you is good or true. The enchanting song of the Sirens was deadly. The ‘Big Lie’ propaganda technique is that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously”, or stake his scholarly reputation on it. The more when it seems to confirm your own prejudices. Heinsohn doesn’t risk to tarnish his ‘scholarly reputation’ attacking the Church because this is the ‘culture medium’ of ‘free thinking’ (and it is financially rewarding too) in which he is immersed. But would you hear Heinsohn ‘questioning’ the ‘holocaust’? It won’t be only his ‘scholarly reputation’ at stake, but his carrier and freedom.

  143. But would you hear Heinsohn ‘questioning’ the ‘holocaust’?

    Heinsohn is a German and he lives and works in Germany. (Bremen, if I recall correctly.) So, as regards your question of whether Heinsohn questions the ‘holocaust’ (at least in public!), of course he doesn’t! One can be imprisoned for that in Germany!

    So why are you even asking question? It just reeks of dishonesty.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Seraphim
  144. @raga10

    …. and I doubt they would fall for the trap of circular logic of “we know this eruption happen this many years ago so we calibrate our base at this many years”. They are scientists after all, give them some credit!

    Well… uhh…. no comment….

    I mean, I really don’t know. As far as I can see, the only real resolution of this particular question would be somebody with some real domain knowledge showing up and clearing up the question.

  145. Anonymous[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Very true, but he’s gone way beyond declining comment or simply blandly affirming the official account. He’s a hard-core Zionist and NATO stooge. I’m open-minded on this question of a missing 700 years, but the fact that Heinsohn has employment with US Empire suggests that the resolution of the question does not really pose a serious threat to establishment historiography.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  146. Anonymous[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @raga10

    LOL, scientists are some of the most closed-minded, ideological herd creatures around. No one has done more to discredit actual science than scientists themselves.

  147. @raga10

    Ar-Ar dating is, if I understand correctly, just a refinement of K-Ar
    (i.e. measures the same decay) by eliminating a possible internal error
    and easing measurement. You do not need to “calibrate” a decay with a
    known initial and rate.
    (it was necessary to calibrate C-14 against tree rings because Urey´s
    assumption – that C-14 production rate is constant – is not in the strict sense true).

    • Thanks: raga10
    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  148. @nokangaroos

    The “new” part was its application to such a young age i.e.
    a demonstration of sensitivity.
    K-40 has a half-life of 1.27 Ga, so classically Pleistocene used to be the limit.

  149. @Anonymous

    Very true, but he’s gone way beyond declining comment or simply blandly affirming the official account. He’s a hard-core Zionist and NATO stooge.

    Well, yeah, I just looked up some of this again and yes, Heinsohn is pretty loathsome (from my POV anyway) on these issues. I had forgotten the full extent of it because I looked into this about a year ago when the earlier chronological revisionism articles came out.

    However, none of that, in and of itself, invalidates his work on the new chronology. And, in any case, it is not about Heinsohn alone. Fomenko is an eminent mathematician, apparently. I grant that this does not absolutely prove anything, but I just tend to think that such people would not waste their time on something that was so easily disproven.

    But generally speaking, there are all these people who tell the truth about some things but then there is a set of things that they will never tell the truth about. In that regard, somebody like Noam Chomsky comes to mind. Chomsky is absolutely terrible on JFK and 9/11 but that doesn’t mean that everything he says is wrong.

    Or, closer to home, look at Ron Unz. He tells the truth about some things — though usually very belatedly. (Columbus sailed the ocean blue…. in 1942…) But then with other things, he’s just terrible. This notion that everybody who disputes the scale of this alleged COVID crisis, or has misgivings about the mass vaccination campaign, is some sort of crackpot… It is very hard for me to see this as honest behavior on his part.

    I guess I’m a strange bird. I really do try, as much as possible, to tell the truth about everything. I mean, at least to the best of my ability. Obviously, like anybody, I can be wrong about some things. And, of course, sometimes, very often actually, being truthful just means admitting that I don’t know anything about the topic at hand!

    To me, that seems like a normal way to behave, but apparently it is quite rare. I receive compliments on this. Wow, you’re so honest, Jon. Well, thanks, but aren’t you supposed to be honest?

  150. Von Rho says:
    @Metropole

    A tautological argument. By the way, NASA failed to explain the observations of its astronomer Robert Newton, who noticed the discrepancy between the D ”’ of lunar orbit and the eclipse dates, thereby arousing Fomenko’s skepticism.

    • Replies: @Moms Basement
  151. Seraphim says:
    @Jonathan Revusky

    Wouldn’t you think that it shows rather Heinsohn’s dishonesty?

    • Replies: @Jonathan Revusky
  152. @Von Rho

    I agree that there is some circular reasoning in Metropole’s argument. There is the assumption that the writer Bukhari actually lived in the 9th century and also that no later editors made additions to his text. Rightly or wrongly, the Fomenko group would not accept either of those assumptions. In fact, they date the rise of Islam to the period after 1421 CE, when a meteorite impact allegedly left a kilometer-diameter crater in an area of Russia where Arabic writing and evidence of ancient metal working have been found. The impact alleged by some geologists would be the largest in recorded history. Fomenko and Nossovksy present evidence that the enormous amount of meteorite material left behind was used to create Damascus steel, the best steel of the Middle Ages for use in weapons and armor.

    By the 17th century, the time of Kepler and continued inquisitions by the Church (altering history by book burning of historical documents as well as religious material), the Jesuits were constructing the presently accepted historical time line and were capable of dating manuscripts on the basis of mentions of solar eclipses. They also capable (being a worldwide network) and, according to some, liable to insert mentions of eclipses in old manuscripts in order to make stories appear more ancient than they really were.

    Frauds of that nature would only be detectable with the advent of computers and more exact measurements of orbits, the Earth’s shape and tidal deformations using satellite data, etc. The 17th century calculations would be off a bit in time and space (nor could they pinpoint total eclipses when stars would become visible). In the case of Ibrahim Mohammeds death, I think the 5-day error is suspiciously like one would expect from fraud. Given the preoccupation of the ancient religious elites with calendars and precisely timed celebrations, I do not think the ancient elites would mistake the day of the week.

    Another point concerning certain types of eclipses: total solar eclipses, during which some stars are briefly visible, are very rare but not so rare that we should not see hundreds of mentions of such dramatic occurrences over the alleged 3000 years or so of alleged written history. Instead, we find only a few mentions. This suggests that the time span of written history is actually much shorter than commonly accepted. Occurrences of total eclipses could not be back-calculated during Kepler’s time so fraud of that type was not possible and I think the fraudsters knew it.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Von Rho
  153. Seraphim says:
    @Moms Basement

    If one wants to know why charlatans like Fomenko, Heinsohn, Illig are so popular it is enough to quote a specialist in Russian History, James H. Billington:
    James H. Billington writes in ”Russia in Search of Itself”, quoting the archeologist V.L. Yanin, who tries to explain why Fomenko’s views have become popular in certain circles: “We live in an epoch of total non-professionalism, which spreads through the entire society from the power structures to the lowest levels of the educational system. The ordinary school produces dilettantes who assume that their miserable and faulty knowledge is adequate for judging professionals. A society bought up on scandals craves negativity and shock effects. It craves the sleight-of-hand trickery of a David Copperfield or an Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko.”
    But there is nothing new. Already Saint Paul was warning that ”the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths”.

  154. Anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @Seraphim

    Who gives a fuck what James H. Billington thinks?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  155. Seraphim says:
    @Anonymous

    Golf Foxtrot Yankee Charlie Romeo Echo Tango India November.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  156. @Seraphim

    Wouldn’t you think that it shows rather Heinsohn’s dishonesty?

    Well, that somebody who lives and works in German (or France or Austria or a host of other countries) does not question the Holocaust narrative is hardly proof that the person is dishonest — more just that he just isn’t recklessly self-destructive.

    Another commenter pointed out (correctly) that Heinsohn goes beyond simply not questioning the sacred narrative. Yes, that could show that he is dishonest, though it is not completely impossible that he believes what he is saying.

    But generally speaking, that somebody is wrong about one thing does not prove that he is wrong about some completely different topic. Ron Unz continually engages in that fallacy, saying that people who argue that the vaccines are harmful, say, also hold crazy views about other topics. (Or some of them do… it’s hard to understand what argument Unz thinks he is making…) Aside from it being fallacious, it’s a very suggestive of a kind of mental laziness. If somebody is arguing something and laying out all his facts and logic, then you really should be engaging in the argument he is making. Screaming that this person says X, Y, or Z about a completely different topic is a very dishonest, lazy way of debating.

  157. @Seraphim

    When it comes to ancient history, unless the person who first recorded some event had a photographic memory whenever he decided to write it down, and his original text is available to us today, then surely whatever we now read about it is open to question. In other words, it’s in the realm of hearsay. People dispute even current and recent events and biographies of living and recently deceased persons, so why should we accept something someone says about events from thousands of years ago as the gospel truth?

  158. @raga10

    I think JR may have led this discussion off track by his being puzzled by discovering in Wikipedia that the Atgon dating method was relstive and required a sample of known age for comparison. On the face of it that doesn’t create a problem. The comparison could be made with, say, rock that emerged from a volcano in one’s own lifetime.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  159. @Jonathan Revusky

    Well done that you have received the applause of two patrons who have at least pretended they weren’t out in the patrons’ lounge having a drink while you played your solo. But do you seriously expect Ron to read all that right down to your question to him?

  160. Anonymous[346] • Disclaimer says:
    @Seraphim

    Buttplug say what?

  161. Anonymous[346] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Yawn.

    • Replies: @WIzard of Oz
  162. “Roman Catholic Church amounts to a totally counterfeit autobiography”

    This absurd conclusion is taking the tendency of the Protestants and Schismatics to the end of the line. In constructing a new religion, groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses would attempt to make a new line of prophets, this “new chronology” is a way to simply obliterate the history of Saint Popes of Rome of the Orthodox Church.

  163. @raga10

    @raga- I think that’s the thrust of this new interpretation; relying on stratigraphy, numismatics and actual period records, buttressed by stuff like chemical and radiological aging techniques.
    My question about all this remains: Where is the alternate timeline being proposed? So…Rome rumbled on until AD5o0 or so then splintered into Frankia, Lombardia, Eastern Rome, and Sryia (and ‘Arabia Felix’?) I get that the Arab peoples are usually totally ignored in the standard histories of Rome even though they had seafaring kingdoms trading with variously Rome and places like India, acting as go-between. That Rome had contact with China is no longer a controversial thing to say.
    Synthesizing the work of people like Joseph Atwill and others who demonstrate that, even if The Dude Jesus was an actual person, the religion built up around him was in every way a Roman creation meant to weld the empire back together as centripetal forces (mostly its own colossal mismanagement) were ripping it apart should be the focus of further efforts in this revisionist discourse.
    As Philip K Dick put it, The Empire never ended. So if some dodgy characters invested so much effort in confabulating a fake chornology…what was it for? Why did they do it? I’m not getting a clear sense about the author’s own thoughts. Presumably this person is someone in academia or they’d sign their name openly.

  164. @obwandiyag

    It is in southern France! I cannot tell you how I know.

  165. Anon[203] • Disclaimer says:

    170. O Mankind! The Messenger hath come to you in truth from Allah: believe in him: It is best for you. But if ye reject Faith, to Allah belong all things in the heavens and on earth: And Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

    [MORE]

    171. O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity”: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.
    ( Quran 4: 170-171 )
    47. O ye People of the Book! believe in what We have (now) revealed, confirming what was (already) with you, before We change the face and fame of some (of you) beyond all recognition, and turn them hindwards, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers, for the decision of Allah Must be carried out.
    48. Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin Most heinous indeed.
    Quran sura An nisaa 4; 47-48.

    14. From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done
    15. O people of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that ye used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary): There hath come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book,
    17. In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: “Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every – one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things.”
    19. O People of the Book! Now hath come unto you, making (things) clear unto you, Our Messenger, after the break in (the series of) our messengers, lest ye should say: “There came unto us no bringer of glad tidings and no warner (from evil)”: But now hath come unto you a bringer of glad tidings and a warner (from evil). And Allah hath power over all things.
    51. O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
    75. Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!
    78. Curses were pronounced on those among the Children of Israel who rejected Faith, by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary: because they disobeyed and persisted in excesses.
    81. If only they had believed in Allah, in the Prophet, and in what hath been revealed to him, never would they have taken them for friends and protectors, but most of them are rebellious wrong-doers.
    82. Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, “We are Christians”: because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.
    83. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: “Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses
    84. “What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us, seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?”
    85. And for this their prayer hath Allah rewarded them with gardens, with rivers flowing underneath,- their eternal home. Such is the recompense of those who do good.
    86. But those who reject Faith and belie our Signs,- they shall be companions of Hell-fire
    .116. And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.
    117. “Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, ‘worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord’; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things.
    ( Quran sura Al Maaida )

  166. Io says:

    Thanks FMR for another fascinating article. Wish to see more of it. I’ve read through comments and it’s really interesting how there is (again) very little quality counter arguments and a lot of trolling. Feels like people have personally been there witnessing events such is their confidence.

    I follow Heinsohns articles for some time now and it seems obvious to me that you need to read between the lines sometimes. For example he uses real late antiquity stuff to legitimate imperial antiquity. I don’t think he really believes Augustus and Tetrarchs were contemporaries but he kind of needs to do it because without Augustus there’s also no Jesus. And I really don’t think he could easily publish stuff where Constantine replaces Augustus and Arianism Christianity. In reality except in stratigraphy (and same historical narrative) there’s no indication of Augustus and Diocletian or Constantine being contemporaries which means one of them is fake.

    As for Heinsohns connection with sionists it’s interesting but I don’t know who has done more historical favour to Arabs lately than him.

    Thanks again.

  167. gT says:

    Just been reading now, in the book “Gibbon making history” by Roy Porter, about how good old Gibbon was lambasting the Byzantium Empire.

    “In Gibbon’s fierce judgement, the real crime of the Eastern empire was that it had left behind no monuments of greatness and had contributed nothing to the future:

    In the revolution of ten centuries, not a single discovery was made to exalt the dignity or promote the happiness of mankind. Not a single idea had been added to the speculative systems of antiquity, and a succession of patient disciples became in their turn the dogmatic teachers of the next servile generation.”

    So they should have discovered flight, nukes, guns and space travel had they had a thousand years in which to progress. Instead “in so far as Byzantine scholars did manage to preserve the memory of classical learning, their sole value to prosperity had been to flee to the West in the teeth of the Turk, and help sow the seeds of the Renaissance in a new soil.” Its much more likely that the Byzantium empire achieved nothing in a thousand years because those thousand years never happened.

  168. Von Rho says:
    @Moms Basement

    Fomenko is a man from hard sciences, so he does not have humanistic culture and ignored that most of descriptions of eclipses are symbolic, not true facts. But his claims against the lack of evidence of present day chronologies, which are five centuries old, are valid.

    • Replies: @Moms Basement
  169. @Von Rho

    When I first read that Fomenko was taking seriously the reference to an eclipse in Luke, I thought he had misinterpreted an obvious literary embellishment. However, his team has made some arguable important discoveries by pursuing the possibility that the eclipse reference was to an actually occurring 12-century-CE event. Much of what they found in this regard is yet to be translated into English.

    It becomes evident when studying his dating of horoscopes in literature and in visual art that he or someone on his team has a sophisticated artistic/literary/political sense as well as mathematical talent. For a person with such a cultural background, discovery of horoscopes hidden in tapestries, bas-reliefs, painted ceilings, etc. would still be daunting but fun. I remember that the eminent art historian E. H. Gombrich boasted many years ago that he was first to identify a horoscope at the Palazzo Farnese; of course he lacked the skills to date what was represented, but I see that recently Fomenko has achieved some datings there and at the Villa Farnese, with or with knowledge of Gombrich.

    Fomenko’s research group has written an open-source computer program, Horos, that can back-calculate dates which horoscopes in art works refer to. It can usually also distinguish between true horoscopes and decorations based upon horoscope themes. Not all artistic representations of horoscopes would be physically possible; a decoration for example might position Mercury, the Sun, and/or Venus at impossible distances from one another and thus could be identified as being a decoration only.

    The Fomenko team have found that some Zodiac representations, particularly in Egypt, actually contain 5 horoscopes – one for a particular event, and four others, one for Spring Equinox, one for Fall Equinox, one for Summer Solstice, and one for Winter Solstice in the year the event took place. This makes interpretation unequivocal; all five horoscopes can be checked for physical possibility and internal consistency, making the case for a deliberate representation of actual planetary positions air-tight. No one else has noticed the five-horoscope representation in Egyptian art and how it can be used to identify a true horoscope and also reveal a unique date.

    The ceiling found in the Egyptian temple at Dendera is an example of a zodiac representation with five horoscopes. (One can easily find images of the Dendera horoscope on the web}. It is a very busy representation and has been an object of study for well over a hundred years. Eminent mathematicians and astronomers have tried to date the horoscope they first detect in the plethora of symbols, but have all failed because they have all assumed that the horoscope must be about 2000 years old. They have then tried to “pinpoint” a date within a roughly 2000-year-old window by dismissing much of the representation as decoration and just locating a couple of easily identifiable planets in the Zodiac. Circular reasoning again.

    Although the Round Zodiac of Dendera has long been considered the oldest in the world, Fomenko team have been able to date the horoscope in the Dendera Zodiac to March 20, 1185 CE precisely. This corresponds to the opinion of the Byzantine princess Anna Komnene, who wrote that astrology was an innovation of her time (11th century CE) and was unknown to the ancients.

    Having achieved results like this, the Fomenko group have felt free to hypothesize in ways that people coming in to this research for the first time would find outrageous. Their hypothesizing, however, is not as outrageous as it seems if one works through their methodology. The methodology is more complex than the stratigraphic method of Heinshon, but both yield valuable information.

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  170. Von Rho says:
    @Moms Basement

    I agree with you about the complexity of Fomenko’s methods. Certainly most of zodiacs give information for their datation. But there is a rule that states the greater the defeat the higher the daydream. Freud wrote something about this comparing the belief in a Gold Age in our childhood (“we were so happy”) with deifying the past of nations, in order to repress our present discomfort. Decadent nations do that. Portugal dreams about the “saudade” of its past maritime glory. Italy, about Rome (furthermore, a Renaissance and Resurgence creation). But we do not see English deifying their past, because they still are a nation of winners and Bojo is only a passing cloud. They still live the same way, updating themselves to present day all the time. They were the pattern of gentlemen elegancy and they still are: Savile Row only updated the looking of their suits. Russia, in opposit, do not have this luck. Poverty, covid, etc. are grassing there despite the efforts of its patriotic leader. As pointed by I. I. Smirnoff in one of the best books I read about secret history (The paths of history), Russia always change route suddenly to disgrace when things start to be successfull. Fomenko is an unhidden paneslavist who is simply delusioning when stated that Russians founded all ancient empires, from India to Mexico (although those empires arenot more than one millenium old, except China that is even more recent). Thus, Yermak and Cortez are not the same person, but their biographies were written in the same epoch using the same litterary style, because at that time writers were encouraged to copy classic patterns, even if historic truth would have been violated (history as a rigorous science is an invention of XIX Century due to Romantism). Heinsohn, by his turn, is a typical present day German. He does not dream with the Reich, repressed by education, but with a Kalergian and Attalian Europe, which includes North Africa and Near East, as it is depicted in an Asterix story in which this character together sailors of several nationalities depart by ship to a mission. Concluding, we must take these authors “cum crano salis”.

    • Replies: @Moms Basement
  171. @Von Rho

    I never warmed up to the identification of Yermak with Cortez either. But I was mightily impressed by the map produced by the cartographer Alexei Ryabtsev while working on some unrelated project. Fomenko includes it in several of his books.

    The map portrays European and West Asian capitols in a special projection that shows true distances from a single point on the Earth’s surface. The map shows that almost all of these capitols lie on one of two semi-circular arcs 1800 kilometers or 2400 kilometers radius from Vladimir.

    The inner arc includes Oslo, Berlin, Prague, Bratislava, Belgrade, Sophia, Istambul, and Ankara. Near this arc, but a little offset, one sees Budapest and Copenhagen.

    Capitols on the arc of larger radius or close by include London, Paris, Amsterdam, Brussels, Luxembourg, Bern, Geneva, Rome, Athens, Nicosia, Beirut, Damascus, Bagdad, and Teheran.

    Vladimir is the only point on the Earth’s surface which serves as a center for this pattern and it is just too cute that “Vladimir” means ruler or conquerer of the world. There has to be some explanation; this isn’t a random pattern. It looks like a deployment of military camps gradually morphing into provincial capitals. There is nothing in conventional history to explain this. It does correspond to the reports of Medieval historians (many censored by the inquisition) that Slavs or “Assyrians” swept through Western Europe and Asia unopposed and established cities and towns there.

    I would post the map here, but cut and paste of the map doesn’t seem to work.

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  172. Von Rho says:
    @Moms Basement

    Censorship of documents from the pre-Scaligerian era: I defy anyone to find a proven family tree or an epigraphic time record dating before 1600. Napoleon censored many documents from the Middle Ages as well, and the fires of Moscow and Washington in 1812 are both very suspicious. The rocket technology used by England came from an Indian maharaja. And the details of the defeat of the sieges of Moscow perpetrated by Hitler and Napoleon are still poorly documented. About Japan: several names of cities before the arrival of the Portuguese resemble Hindu names. The Korean alphabet is closer to Dravidic than Chinese. There must have been a circumpacific empire (which explains why developed Mesoamerican cultures did not reach the Antilles) close to Hindu culture (rather than Chinese , which maintained pre-polytheistic animism and imported theocratic institutions from neighbors, being its “glorious past” another Jesuit invention) prior to the European conquest.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  173. Seraphim says:
    @Von Rho

    It is tragic seeing how lunacy preached from the ‘academic’ pulpits can affect people’s minds. More effective than MKUltra! Fomenko/Heinsohn ‘theories’ are an application of the ‘paranoiac-critical method’ of the ‘surrealists’.

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  174. Von Rho says:
    @Seraphim

    Lunacy is also to believe that fanatical monks who destroyed all the masterpieces of the classical world (just it is described in their translated Classic historians texts) would have kept hidden in their monasteries for a millennium thousands of statues, texts, etc., waiting for the Renaissance. They would have been so selfless to the point of going through a famine killing thousands of lambs so that thousands of scrolls would not be lacking to save all those scriptures for posterity. Spengler realized all of this too, just as the similarities between the civilizations of Pre-Columbian America and the Fertile Crescent suggested that the two could not be separated by a gap in time.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  175. Seraphim says:
    @Von Rho

    Sadly, you are beyond redemption.

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  176. Von Rho says:
    @Seraphim

    Fortunately, if you believe that the “redemptor” existed your case is not so serious. As Ghislain said, religion is the allowed lunacy.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  177. Seraphim says:
    @Von Rho

    Ghislaine Maxwell?

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  178. Von Rho says:
    @Seraphim

    Sorry, I typed wrong. I intended Joseph Guislain, a Belgian psychiatrist who was one of the first to study the relationship between religion and psychopatology and who said “psychiatry is the pathology of freedom”. To be honest, I do not remember if the phrase I mentioned was said by Guislain or Emmanuel Regis, or even by Julio de Mattos. But taking the ocasion with the person you mentioned, she would become ashamed with the bas-relief sculptures of some Catholic churches showed by Fomenko in “The Issue With Dark Ages” (Delamere Resources LLC), chapter 3 (The mediaeval Western European Christian cult and the “ancient” pagan Bacchic celebrations).

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  179. Seraphim says:
    @Von Rho

    So, how would you know whether someone talks seriously when he/she cannot get the names of the authorities with which he/she slaps your mouth rightly?

    • Replies: @Von Rho
  180. Von Rho says:
    @Seraphim

    For this issue, my apologies. But be sure to read what I suggested in the previous post. Although Fomenko is often delusional, the images he showed are astonishing and show that Christian moralism is something from later times.

  181. Seraphim says:

    Such ‘mistakes’ reveal an absence of critical spirit. You play by ear and don’t feel the need to check. Same with the enthusiasm for Fomenko. You embraced his lucubrations because it is what you like to hear, the ‘challenge’ to the ‘authorities’ who tell you what to think. Have you questioned what is behind his delusions? The absurdity of the ‘Russian Horde’, of the ‘Slav-Turk Empire’ which raised such enthusiasm among the pseudo-nationalist fringe movements in Russia?

  182. Von Rho says:

    If you read what I posted you will notice I explained how Fomenko is a paneslavist and Heinsohn an europeist and that both can not be taken “prêt a porter”, but considered by the incongruences in the mainstream chronology that they have shown. Instead to stay repeating blames against me, I suggest something more productive, such as to explain the referred images in churches. If have a trustworthy source about this matter, I would be glad to learn.

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  183. Seraphim says:
    @Von Rho

    What would be a ‘trustworthy’ source for you? What do you mean by ‘trustworthy’?

  184. Von Rho says:

    A reliable source, which should rather be primary. For example, when we say that there is no genealogical tree before 1600 it is because we do not find any original document in registries before that, but only indirect mentions or allusions even to mythological lineages, that could easily not be authentic. Look now at the images referred by Fomenko. The images are a reliable source but we do not have any explanation of mainstream science about them, only silence. Fomenko uses those images to convince us that paganism was a later step of Christianity. It almost certainly wasn’t, but images of Bacchic and orgiastic cults in Catholic churches reveal that those practices were not heterodoxies, but mainstream – if we avoid to say that was pure orthodoxy – at that time. What a contrast with Ultramontanian movement of 19th century and all the moralistic speeech of prayers.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The First Millennium Revisionist Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement