- Taschenbuch: 560 Seiten
- Verlag: Mithec; Auflage: 1st (30. Juli 2005)
- Sprache: Englisch
- ISBN-10: 2913621066
- ISBN-13: 978-2913621060
- Größe und/oder Gewicht: 17,8 x 3,8 x 22,9 cm
- Durchschnittliche Kundenbewertung: Schreiben Sie die erste Bewertung
- Amazon Bestseller-Rang: Nr. 312.332 in Fremdsprachige Bücher (Siehe Top 100 in Fremdsprachige Bücher)
History: Fiction or Science? Chronology II (Englisch) Taschenbuch – 30. Juli 2005
|Neu ab||Gebraucht ab|
Wird oft zusammen gekauft
Kunden, die diesen Artikel gekauft haben, kauften auch
Es wird kein Kindle Gerät benötigt. Laden Sie eine der kostenlosen Kindle Apps herunter und beginnen Sie, Kindle-Bücher auf Ihrem Smartphone, Tablet und Computer zu lesen.
Geben Sie Ihre Mobiltelefonnummer ein, um die kostenfreie App zu beziehen.
Wenn Sie dieses Produkt verkaufen, möchten Sie über Seller Support Updates vorschlagen?
If you agree with Fomenko that Roman chronology is basically the foundation of the entire edifice of global chronology; you would also certainly agree that despite its numerous gaps and inconsistencies, Roman history is the best-documented field of ancient history, and thus a reference scale. But how well is the actual date of the Eternal City's foundation known? Firstly, Rome is supposed to have been founded by the Trojans who had to flee after the fall of Troy. Some claim Rome to have been founded by Aeneas and Ulysses shortly after Troy had fallen; others are of the opinion that there was an entire dynasty that ruled for 500 years between the fall of Troy and the foundation of Rome. Well, that's just an innocent 500 years long misunderstanding compared with what heretic Fomenko says, asserts, proves in his second volume: Second Roman Empire, Third Roman Empire, Biblical Kingdom of Israel, Biblical Kingdom of Judah, Holy Roman Empire are stories about basically same events, written from different points of view at different times. The underlying events have actually taken place during xii-xv cy. These histories have been written and perfected by multitude of highly talented humanist and clerical writers of xiii-xvi cy disguised as "ancients" with glorious names like Homer, Pluto, Thucydides etc..Chronology 2.0 beta.. Historians are kindly invited to report the bugs. (Poggio Bracciolini, Rome, Italy)
was somewhat astonished to see a preface concerned with compatibility of astronomy and history . Apparently, mediaeval and "ancient" chronicles refer to several spectacular solar eclipses accompaning the important events. The heavens validated thus the claim of the party that won the day and time-stampted it. Things celestial were in high demand in 16-17th cy, therefore the scolars "confirmed" ancient events with a remarkable astronomical phenomena; their learned astrology friends furnished an "exact" dating for vanity eclipse. This had been the prevailing agenda in the correspondence between the founding father of chronology Joseph Scaliger, a Jesuit, and Johannes Kepler, a fellow Jesuit and the founding father of astronomy. All this "science" had been approximate, and calculated dates scholastic and arbitrary, the reason being that both the model and data were way too crude. The Apollo missions would have missed the Moon if their trajectory calculation had been based on the Earth-Moon model of the XVI-XVII century. The astronomers knew about lunar tidal friction already in XVIII century, but could not calculate it. In the XVIII-XIX century they tried to use it for calculating "historical" data, coming up with a horrendous mess as a result. Actually, to make valid reverse calculations of solar eclipses giving precise time, place, phase and duration one needs an atomic clock, a laser, a satellite, a computer and a special software suite. Moreover, such calculations can only be reliable if the Earth-Moon system is stable during the period of research. Fomenko presumes it stable until proven contrary. Once properly recalculated with the aid of modern computers and software, all the "ancient" eclipses turn out to be mediaeval - or fake. In this volume Fomenko gives his final analysis of the eclipse tried described by Thucydides, dating them to 1039,1046 and 1057 AD, discovers the layered structure of this extremely rare authentic mediaeval manuscript, and att (Peter A. Cunningham (Oxford, UK))
Asserts that most of 'World History' is a fiction! Learn how and why Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented and crafted during Renaissance. Discover the Old Testament as a veiled rendition of events of Middle Ages written centuries after the New Testament. Perceive the Crusaders as contemporaries of The Crucifixion punishing the tormentors of the Messiah. What if Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD? Sounds unbelievable! Not after you've read this book by Anatoly Fomenko, a leading mathematician of our time. He follows in the steps of Sir Isaac Newton, finds clear evidence of falsification of History by medieval clergy and humanists. Armed with computers, astronomy and statistics he proves the history of humankind to be both dramatically different and drastically shorter than generally presumed. Archaeological, dendrochronological, paleographical and carbon methods of dating of ancient sources and artifacts are both non-exact and contradictory, therefore there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artifact that could be reliably and independently dated earlier than the eleventh century.Alle Produktbeschreibungen
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen auf Amazon.com (beta) (Kann Kundenrezensionen aus dem "Early Reviewer Rewards"-Programm beinhalten)
Fomenko's research does not in fact provide a new understanding of history for me, a new veil to adopt as reality. Rather, it pulls aside the old veil of "established" history and leaves a breathtaking open field. In that openness, with the veil which has heretofore served as reality, ripped aside, there are questions begging for answers. What DID happen before the XVI-XIX centuries (possibly - and I hope - to be answered in other of his texts, such as that regarding Russian Tartary or the problems of Chronology)?
A more fundamental question to be answered is, if we have been so easily duped by numbers - in this case, dates - what else are we being duped about? What is the next veil to be pulled aside? What is the nature of time? Einstein is quoted, "... us physicists believe the separation between past, present, and future is only an illusion, although a convincing one."
Fomenko's work provides answers that lead to more questions. The journey is stimulating. Enlightening, too, but as we move, as it were, we pass under one streetlight into the night. What is the next streetlight that will show the ground beneath our feet and hasten us further on our journey?
Since we're talking here about chronology, my mind turns to the mythical "Chronos," which may represent the reality of time as we experience it, the fourth dimension. Meanwhile, perhaps "Kronus" is the counterfeit, the falsification. Fomenko points toward the reality and exposes the falsification. Perhaps the "real" cannot be expressed in words; however, the false can be identified and exposed, thus furthering the quest. I welcome any such furtherance.
However, I did find a close correspondence between Herodotus' Persian kings and medieval events:
- the defeat and capture of an Anatolian king - the Lydian Croesus - by the Persian conqueror Cyrus is identical to the defeat and capture of another Anatolian king - sultan Bayezid - by the Asian/Mongol conqueror Tamerlane;
- the Persian conquest of Egypt by the cruel tyrant Cambyses reds almost exactly as the Ottoman conquest of Egypt by Selim the Grim (note the nickname!);
- Darius the Lawgiver of the Persian Empire looks very much alike to Sulayman the Magnificent, the Lawgiver in Islamic history;
- Xerxes, whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by the Greeks at the naval battle of Salamis, looks like Selim II (the Sot) whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by a Spanish-Italian alliance at the naval battle of Lepanto.
I should have expected Fomenko et al. to arrive at similar conclusions, however, they claim that the Persian kings are the alter egos of the Angevin kings of Sicily whose biographies do not contain the exploits of the Persian kings.
The similiarities I indicate lead to the conclusion that Herodotus must have written his Histories at the close of the 16th century. But this is extremely late, given that Herodotus is "the Father of History", so therefore all other "ancient" histories must have been fabricated even later. Yet, the founders of modern chronology - Scaliger and Petavius - laid their foundations also at the close of the 16th century and had the full corpus of ancient histories already at their disposal.
It seems to me that Fomenko has to address these inconsistencies, maybe in the forthcoming 5 volumes?
Another critique of their book is that the correspondencies between different rulers are often based on a superficial comparison of the biographies; upon a more thorough comparison many details appear that do not correspond at all.
Finally, the authors rely heavily on the works of Gregorovius (1821-1891!!) - his medieval histories of Rome and Athens - as the source of medieval history; these works are - at least in the West - hoplessly outdated and have been superceded by more up-to-date works (for instance, Julius Norwich's trilogy on Byzantine history is not even cited).