Jetzt eintauschen
und EUR 0,10 Gutschein erhalten
Möchten Sie verkaufen? Hier verkaufen
Der Artikel ist in folgender Variante leider nicht verfügbar
Keine Abbildung vorhanden für
Keine Abbildung vorhanden

Den Verlag informieren!
Ich möchte dieses Buch auf dem Kindle lesen.

Sie haben keinen Kindle? Hier kaufen oder eine gratis Kindle Lese-App herunterladen.

History: Fiction or Science? [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

Anatoly T. Fomenko
5.0 von 5 Sternen  Alle Rezensionen anzeigen (4 Kundenrezensionen)

Erhältlich bei diesen Anbietern.

Weitere Ausgaben

Amazon-Preis Neu ab Gebraucht ab
Taschenbuch EUR 33,50  
Taschenbuch, 28. Februar 2004 --  


28. Februar 2004
"History: Fiction or Science?" crowns 30 years of meticulous and extensive research performed by the eminent mathematician Anatoly Fomenko and his colleagues. This research started in fact as a unbelievable byproduct of russian-american competition in Moon exploration, when famous NASA scientist Robert Newton discovered a very strange phenomenon in lunar mechanics. This book is also the first volume in seven comprising "Chronology", the fundamental oeuvre that exposes and expounds the numerous inveracities of the traditional version of history. "History: Fiction or Science?" contains data and conclusions that aren t anything short of revolutionary. The alternatives offered to classical history are stunning, unorthodox to the extent of being labelled heretical by virtually every scholar of history, and daring enough to be considered preposterous at first sight, although this impression never lasts longer than it takes one to read a few pages attentively. In chapter I we are reminded of when the contemporary chronological scale was created and by whom, with the culprits named as the XVI-XVII century clergy that was in charge of all matters historical in that age. We also learn that the consensual model of history had prominent critics ever since its creation among them such names as Sir Isaac Newton and Jean Hardouin, chief librarian of Louis XIV, the Sun King of France. The author dissects every historical age and analyses the data from every source imaginable Roman and Egyptian chronology take a good beating, and it goes rapidly downhill from there. Poggio Bracciolini and Petrarch take the blame for creating the legend of a mythical Classical age that never was. The Biblical events are moved a lot closer to us historically, as well as geographically (the Biblical Jerusalem being identified with the mediaeval Constantinople, for instance). The New and the Old Testament swap their positions on the chronological scale, both exposed as referring to mediaeval
-- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine andere Ausgabe: Taschenbuch .

Kunden, die diesen Artikel angesehen haben, haben auch angesehen


  • Taschenbuch: 624 Seiten
  • Verlag: MITHEC (28. Februar 2004)
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • ISBN-10: 2913621058
  • ISBN-13: 978-2913621053
  • Größe und/oder Gewicht: 23,6 x 17,8 x 4,1 cm
  • Durchschnittliche Kundenbewertung: 5.0 von 5 Sternen  Alle Rezensionen anzeigen (4 Kundenrezensionen)
  • Amazon Bestseller-Rang: Nr. 383.736 in Fremdsprachige Bücher (Siehe Top 100 in Fremdsprachige Bücher)

Mehr über den Autor

Entdecken Sie Bücher, lesen Sie über Autoren und mehr



History: Fiction Or Science? is a quite scholarly expose of the extreme limitations of our understanding of human history. So few physical records have survived hundreds, let alone thousands of years that it casts even the most conventional understanding of what really happened into doubt. Chapters address the problems of historical chronology in general, astronomical datings, astronomy in the Old Testament, methods of dating ancient events via mathematical statistics, the construction of a global chronological map, the Dark Ages, and much more. Black-and-white illustrations add a vivid touch to this scholarly work that may appear controversial yet deals with a very serious issue directly affecting humanity's comprehension of its own past. --Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA) (Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA))

Earth was flat. Humans saw that it was flat, books were telling scholars that it was flat, teachers were teaching students it was flat; scientists knew it was flat. There was some disagreement about the way it was kept afloat, most common versions were elephants, whales and turtles, but that was subject for scientific discussion. Until Magellan sailed around the globe and proved all this science wrong. This book is precisely about same situation. Although it is written for casual reader, it still bears all the traits of scientific research. Anyway, history as a science is based on books written by previous generation of historians, who based their works on works of previous generation of historians, supplemented by archeological digs (great deal of assumptions was made there too, as people didn't usually mark their belongings with dates), so it definitely needs some mathematical treatment. It is very difficult to digest the new version of history from Fomenko without getting allergic shock. Official timeline is accepted in the same way as gravity, and movement of the sun; many nations have developed their identity based on official history. Literally speaking chronology is in our culture, in our roots, personal identity. Someone said here that this book was written by Russian nationalist to reassure Russian national identity. May be so, but I think for Russians will be very difficult to swallow that they were actually Mongols and Tatars too. This book will turn your world upside down. Literally. --New Book Review, 03-03-2007 (CA, USA) (New Book Review, 03-03-2007 (CA, USA)) -- Dieser Text bezieht sich auf eine andere Ausgabe: Taschenbuch .


This is the most explosive tractate on history and chronology ever written. This book is not another conspiracy theory - every hypothesis it contains is backed by solid scientific data. The book is well-illustrated, contains 446 graphs and illustrations, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the chronology used nowadays. You will be amazed to discover: That the chronology universally taken for granted is indeed wrong; That this chronology was essentially invented in the XVI-XVII century; That archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical and carbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts known today are erroneous or non-exact; That there is not a single document that could be reliably dated earlier than the XIth century; That Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were crafted during the Renaissance by humanists and clergy; That Jesus Christ may have been born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD; That the Old Testament is probably a rendition of Middle Ages events; That the Old Europe is not as ancient as it claims.

Welche anderen Artikel kaufen Kunden, nachdem sie diesen Artikel angesehen haben?

In diesem Buch (Mehr dazu)
"One often comes across accounts of a steel chisel found in the external masonry of the Great Pyramid of Cheops (Khufu, the beginning of XXX century b.c.); however, it is indeed most probable that said tool got there during a later age, when the pyramid stones were pillaged for building purposes." Lesen Sie die erste Seite
Mehr entdecken
Ausgewählte Seiten ansehen
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Rückseite
Hier reinlesen und suchen:

Eine digitale Version dieses Buchs im Kindle-Shop verkaufen

Wenn Sie ein Verleger oder Autor sind und die digitalen Rechte an einem Buch haben, können Sie die digitale Version des Buchs in unserem Kindle-Shop verkaufen. Weitere Informationen


4 Sterne
3 Sterne
2 Sterne
1 Sterne
5.0 von 5 Sternen
5.0 von 5 Sternen
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen
1 von 1 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen Mehr Frage als Rezension 22. Dezember 2013
Format:Taschenbuch|Verifizierter Kauf
Die Buchreihe ist einfach brillant. Ich habe den Band 1 bereits 3 x gelesen, man findet immer neue Kostbarkeiten.
Und die Welt sieht man mit neuen Augen.
Ich habe auch die Bände 5-7 in Russisch und allein das ungeheure Bildmaterial ist den Kauf wert.
Aber ich kann Russsisch nicht so gut und die englische Edition ist Welten besser.
Wann also kommen die Bände 5-7 in Englisch???
Der Verlag ist unauffindbar, der Autor nicht zu kontaktieren, kann hier jemand helfen?
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
5.0 von 5 Sternen Alle 20. Dezember 2012
Von vega
Man soll weitere Bände davon lesen, man würde dann auch begreifen warum heute die Welt so geworden ist... Absolut empfehlenswert!
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
4 von 7 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen The best book about real history! 18. Juni 2007
Von Carlos
Hey, this is as good as Richard Dawkins' genius book « God delusion », a real eye-opener. A friend passed it on to me, I was really bamboozled! We're having discussions here, about different book's topics, most of those who start as vehement critics of it and ardent defenders of consensual history version end up... the other way round! You don't need to agree upon everything it claims, but I think it's important that there's an alternative view that asks the rights questions so that you start to use your brains. Open your eyes and gape at what's going on in this world! Thanks a lot to the publishers!

I appreciated the astronomical datings issue (Chapter 2), especially about the Egyptian zodiacs (which happen to be all of medieval origin...). Another superbly written topic: the dating of ancient geographical maps (Chapter 5.11), or the 'Dark Ages' that never happened. I find the whole book very convincing, it doesn't boast with a completely polished chronological scale, it stirs the right questions like the lack of written evidence etc. And it is really very, very high science!
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
6 von 15 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen recht interessant 27. März 2004
die apokalypse des johannes beschreibt die sternenkonstellation vom 1. 10. 1486 - das ist doch recht interessant? viele werden über dergleichen richtiggehend wütend, so interessant ist es.
War diese Rezension für Sie hilfreich?
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen auf (beta) 3.9 von 5 Sternen  58 Rezensionen
61 von 73 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
4.0 von 5 Sternen A better written explanation 29. Dezember 2004
Von M. Woodward - Veröffentlicht auf
About 10 years ago, I ploughed through Fomenko's two-volume Kluver set of independent papers that, taken together, form the outline of the current volume. It was tough going (non-idiomatic translations, lots of repetition, often written like a mathematical proof). I became instantly disoriented, thought about it long and hard for years, reviewed the volumes on Amazon, and spent bunches of hours in a local university library following odd leads and trying to see if there was any possibility that any of Fomenko's theorizing could be grounded in reality.

I read Robert Newton's condemnation of Ptolemy; Anthony Grafton's dissertation on Scaliger (and other writings about Medieval forgeries); F.F. Arbuthnott's peculiar disquisition (ca. 1900) on English history and the probability that the further back from Henry VIII you go the less you know (and why the Irish monks who "saved civilization" may have had other agendas); about Isaac Newton's chronological explorations; about the inconsistencies in radio-carbon dating; about an odd series of parallel "dark ages" in circum-Mediterranean cultures ca. 1200-to-800 BCE that can best be explained by positing that the period in question didn't exist; and a volume about the relatively late evolution of the concept of "absolute time." Taken together with the astronomical and mathematical data presented by Fomenko that, to this educated non-scientist, seems eminently plausible, I have pretty much concluded that there is a lot of room for irregularity in the received chronology of history.

This first (of seven!) volumes of Fomenko's work explains in far better English and more detail what his earlier papers explicated. It should be approached critically, will be derided and dismissed everywhere (and is not aided by Fomenko citing Velikovsky as one of the early "fellow travellers" along this path), but lays out a fascinating possibility that will take more than one reading and a lot of deep thought to assimilate and form any judgment about.

But it gives new lives to the common aphorism "History is written by the winners," Henry Ford's offhand dictum "History is more or less bunk," and Napoleon's prescient (?) "History is fable of fiction agreed upon."

I suddenly don't look at anything that happened before the Renaissance with anything like the certitude I once did.
120 von 150 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen A Pretty Wild Theory 22. Februar 2005
Von Timothy Horrigan - Veröffentlicht auf
Format:Taschenbuch|Verifizierter Kauf
This book presents a wildly radical restructuring of the timeline of world history. It is written by an outsider to the world of historical scholarship: Fomenko is a non-historian (a renowned mathematician) and an non-Westerner (from Russia.)

Fomenko's theory says, basically, that everything we are told about history pre-1600 is BS. Ancient history is, according to Fomenko, based on evidence quote-unquote "discovered" since the 15th century and arranged into a spurious standard timeline in the 18th century. (In some cases, the evidence was discovered much more recently: some Eastern religious texts were only uncovered in the 20th century.) Fomenko collates this evidence to argue that all those ancient chronicles are different versions of events which really happened roughly between 1000 AD and 1400 AD. The key event in Fomenko's timeline is the life of Christ (who was born in 1053 AD rather than 6BC, Fomenko believes.) After a relatively short-lived Eurasian empire disintegrated, each nation made up their own version of the empire's history, and generally each new version of the story was set farther back into the past than the previous one. (The newest version is the Hindu Krishna myth which is set about 10,000 years before the present day.)

This is an appealing theory, since it eliminates the various "dark ages" which blemish the conventional chronology. On the other hand, this is an appalling theory, since it creates one big dark age extending from the beginning of time till 900 AD or so.

The book is translated from the Russian. There is no index, and the bibliography is rather annoyingly arranged in the original Russian alphabetical order (so for example, B's and V's are mixed together.) But the translation is extremely readable, more readable than most historical works originally written in English.

This is the first book in a projected 7-volume set.

The online bookstore entries for this volume rather amusingly show easily history gets mixed up. The translator is someone named Michael Jagger who is almost certainly not the singer Mick Jagger (whose full name is Michael Phillip Jagger.) However, some online bookstores do list Mick Jagger as a coauthor. says the translator is someone named Mike Jagupov. This is hard enough to keep straight while the singer is still alive, and a few decades from now, I am sure that many sources will say that the legendary Rolling Stones frontman translated this book into English.

(I have no idea if Mick Jagger speaks Russian or not. Although he is an educated man--- an alumnus of the University of London--- one would assume that he doesn't. Certainly, in all the millions of words which have been written about him, no one has commented on his knowledge of the Russian language. And, if he actually was the person who translated this controversial text into English, the book's publishers would presumably be aggressively advertising that fact.)
133 von 167 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen Don't review if you haven't read 4. Februar 2005
Von Crab McNasty - Veröffentlicht auf
Format:Taschenbuch|Verifizierter Kauf
You learned history when you were a young lad from someone who learned it from someone who..... but who started it all?
What's wrong with asking this question? Some people would burn Mr. Fomenko at the stake for saying the Earth isn't flat.

I bought this book as a novelty but I ended up being quite impressed with it. I wouldn't say I'm totally sold on all the crazy ideas Mr. fomenko puts out but they certainly are more plausable than you might think. He does a thorough job of showing how early "historians" were really working for the pope. Most were monks with limited resources, personal and religious agendas, and a willingness to fudge it whenever they didn't know (or like) the truth. You'll be amazed at how meticulously he presents his evidence that the dark ages were so dark because they never happened. Your head will probably start to ache when you get to the section where he analyzes historical timelines statistically (at least mine did). However, the parallels truly are startling.

The first four chapters alone are worth the price of the book. Even if you don't believe any of it I'm sure you will at least question why we take the foundations of historical knowledge so seriously without solid justification. There's more to this book than you could know without actually reading it!
60 von 75 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen Crackpots. Conspiracies. History. Science. 12. Juni 2004
Von Peter A. Cunningham - Veröffentlicht auf
When I picked up "History: Fiction or Science?" for the first time, it was out of sheer curiosity. I appreciate crackpots and crackpot conspiracy theories of all sorts - one could say that I have a private freak collection on a separate bookshelf. Therefore, this entire history revision business looked very much like it belonged there as well, so I decided to give it a go. My initial reaction was disappointment; the author sounded perfectly sane, which is simply out of order, if you ask me (a good crackpot theorist is always stark raving mad, hence the interest - never a dull moment anywhere). Then I started to read deeper into the book and, as I submerged about thirty pages deep, the remnants of my ironic grin dropped to the floor along with my jaw. The stuff actually made sense. No hysterical overtones or complex paranoid theorizing anywhere - it is certainly a scientific work written in a manner that has academia stamped all over, no doubt about it.
The critic in me would keep arguing with the authors every now and then - yet they never fail to emphasize the hypothetical nature of their reconstructions. Some of the hypotheses make perfect sense, others do not - which pleases me greatly, since I am most wary of books that make me agree with everything instantly; their integrity is nearly always heavily compromised in some way, yet never too obviously (the best crackpot conspiracy theorists are the ones you can't help agreeing with, and once you agree with enough, you find yourself ready to agree with the bloke who says reptiles rule the world). Here, you may be offered several contradictory renditions of the same historical event. Once again, I wouldn't have it any other way - anyone who is gullible enough to believe simple and unequivocal explanations offered by the official historical sources is usually unaware that those, in turn, contain numerous gaps, inconsistencies, and contradictions.
I always knew that history, especially ancient history, has been a collection of fairy tales all along; still it took me some time to accommodate the thought that, for want of a better metaphor, even the fairy tales it consists of were culled from a wide variety of books, shuffled together like a very dodgy deck of cards, then put into a random sequence, given a new index and proclaimed the only authorised collection of fairy tales in the world (and children who ask silly questions about why certain things make no sense or whether there are any other, more interesting tales available elsewhere need spanking, of course - a time-honoured tradition, isn't it then?). Well, the Russian mathematicians do ask questions. Lots of questions. Questions which there was a very long tradition of not asking; ones that concern the very foundations of modern chronology (although "modern" might be a misleading term here, since said chronology is a child of the Middle Ages). And the historians who demand a spanking shaking fists and frothing at the mouth make me want to put every book on history that I own on the crackpot shelf - certainly not Fomenko and team. Indeed, I haven't put them on any shelf yet, since I'm reading the book for the third time over, and eagerly anticipating the second volume.
60 von 76 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen History and Astronomy are not compatible 29. April 2005
Von Dr. PhD Bela Lukacs - Veröffentlicht auf
This is a most unusual book, one that undermines the very foundations of History. According to the author and his team of researchers, History as it has been taught in Europe ever since the Renaissance is fundamentally false, verified history beginning around 1250 AD the earliest. Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086, the First Crusade being an immediate reaction to his Crucifixion. Homer identifies an an anonymous poet of the second half of XIII century AD, and the event led to the creation of the Iliad had been the fall of the Latin Empire of Constantinople in 1261 AD. The list goes on and on.
Historians generally oppose the author's views without making much commentary. The author is not a historian, they say, period. He is only a leading differential geometrician, successful and respected, author of many advanced textbooks. A. Fomenko is also a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences; his main argumentation is of a statistical and astronomical nature. I happen to be a physicist myself and not a historian. However, astronomy and differential geometry are known to me well from the area of general relativity, and I cannot recommend this book enough, since its author approaches History, usually a highly emotional discipline ascribed to the field of humanities, armed with impartial mathematics.
History is collective memory; yet even our own memory errs at times, and no real memory extends beyond three generations. There are written sources, but each one of those might easily prove a forgery. There are material remnants of archaeological nature, but they may be misadated and misinterpreted.
Astronomy is precise by definition, and a historical dating that can be calculated from information about eclipses should satisfy any researcher. Yet the XIX century astronomers did not use the lunar tidal friction value in the equations of lunar motion, which would make ancient lunar eclipses appear several hours off the mark and relocate completely several total eclipses of the sun geographically (assuming tidal friction value has remained the same all the time but there is no reason to believe it hasn't). How could XIX century calculations have conformed to consensual history?
I must say that a methodical recalculation of ancient eclipse datings shall invariably bring surprises; in the unlikely case these datings are correct, we shall prove the existence of erratic changes in telluric rotation over the last 4,000 years instead. Both possibilities are highly alarming.
Fomenko demonstrates the incompatibility between consensual history and modern astronomy. This incompatibility is a sad fact. (He exposes a number of other contentious issues as well, but those do not fall into my professional scope). Which is more reliable - history or hard-boiled scientific facts? Science cannot afford subjectivity; most of us would feel the same way about history as well.
Chronological problems are very serious indeed; Fomenko offers a viable solution to most of them, and a radical one at that - a "Copernican revolution" of history, no less. I am not using the term to predict the final and total victory of his version; that is a matter for a multitude of scientific and scholarly discussions to come. But the contradiction between history and astronomy that becomes graver with the day cannot and must not be tolerated, in the best interests of both history and the theory of telluric rotation.
Dr.PhD B. Lukács
Waren diese Rezensionen hilfreich?   Wir wollen von Ihnen hören.
Kundenrezensionen suchen
Nur in den Rezensionen zu diesem Produkt suchen

Kunden diskutieren

Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Diskussion Antworten Jüngster Beitrag
Noch keine Diskussionen

Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen
Neue Diskussion starten
Erster Beitrag:
Eingabe des Log-ins

Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
Alle Amazon-Diskussionen durchsuchen

Ähnliche Artikel finden

Ihr Kommentar