42 replies to this topic

[Harsh86_Patel]

http://www.world-mys....com/sci_16.htm

Came across this link and read a little more about it.Thought it is a very interesting concept and like to know more and discuss the same.

[Harsh86_Patel]

http://en.wikipedia....ology_(Fomenko)

As usual wiki article is laden with criticism but i feel he has somethings going for him (i mean Fomenko)

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

I seem to recall a theory espoused hereabouts once that the year was 1810 not 2010 becuase we basically accidentally added 200 years to the Dark Ages.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Even if New chronology is not a correct extrapolation but still it highlights how cyclical some historical events are.

[questionmark]

Wearer of Hats, on 27 September 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

I seem to recall a theory espoused hereabouts once that the year was 1810 not 2010 becuase we basically accidentally added 200 years to the Dark Ages.

Oh yes, see, the world did not end in 2000 as it was supposed to, so they had to add some years from somewhere to not look like the morons they are

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Fomenko is wrong. It is very obvious. Recently his ideas have been denounced as being likely to disturb the mental wellbeing of people. The state believes there is simply too much end of the world doom and gloom on internet, particulary youtube, and have made vague comments that this should be rectified. Personally I am totally against censorship. If anybody wants to make themselves look foolish, then let them.
However, this site by Sergey Apin is much more sensible as it deals with science and not the quasi religious nonsense of Fomenko
http://www.sergey-apin.ru/

[Quaentum]

Harsh86_Patel, on 27 September 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

http://en.wikipedia....ology_(Fomenko)

As usual wiki article is laden with criticism but i feel he has somethings going for him (i mean Fomenko)

From http://www.thunderbo...78f6ee956a5a420

Quote

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.

Quote

Volume 2 shows how the timelines of the "First" through "Third" Roman empires, ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, and the Bible are all reflections of events which took place in so-called "Medieval" times. The reason pre-1600 history tends to move in cycles of about 350 years (punctuated by Dark Ages) is, we are told, because there only is about 350 years of pre-1600 history in the first place.

According to Fomenko, nothing happened before 1000 CE.  Everything, even ancient history happened 1000 CE - 1400 CE

I think that pretty much invalidates his theories.

[Harsh86_Patel]

But his research can be helpful in mapping events which are thought to be independant but are actually one and the same.Though his whole hypothesis can be rejected but the kind of work he is doing can be useful to some extent.

[Harsh86_Patel]

The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries. The exact same name could take on an entirely different meaning in different historical epochs. Geographical locations were clearly defined on maps, only with the advent of printing. This made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes in the fields of the military, navigation, education and governance, etc. Before the invention of printed maps, each original map was a unique work of art, both beautiful, non-exact and contradictory.

Mainstream Historians from Oxford say: «stop... everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C. Do you really doubt it?» Yes, we really do. For us this statement is only a point of view that is dominant today. But it is only one of many possible points of view until the very fact of his life and deeds is proven.

In turn, we will also ask some simple questions: where did you get your information? from a textbook? That’s not good enough. Who was the first to say that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.? What book, document and/or manuscript can you quote as a primary source? Who is the author of this source? When and by whom was this primary source written down and where discovered, if you please?

We do not accept «the textbook says so» type of answer as proof. As soon as you dig for proof slightly deeper than the school textbook, the adamant grounds for the totally and utterly dominant point of view suddenly evaporate. The whole world community of professional historians will not be able to come with up irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar EVER existed, be it on paper, papyri, parchment or stone. Same story for ALL great names of Antiquity. The proof is unavailable!


This if true comes across as quite stunning.

[Quaentum]

One area of study that seems to be overlooked is Genealogy.  We know who the descendants of Julius Caesar are and by starting closest to modern day and working backwards we can help determine approximately when a person lived.

[The_Spartan]

Let me ask  a layman question.

What is conventional chronology based on?

What is New Chronology Based on?

IMHO, conventional Chronology is based on actual evidences, dating - both absolute and relative.

I don't know what New Chronology is based on..at all.

If harsh could elaborate???

[Quaentum]

The_Spartan, on 28 September 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Let me ask  a layman question.

What is conventional chronology based on?

What is New Chronology Based on?

IMHO, conventional Chronology is based on actual evidences, dating - both absolute and relative.

I don't know what New Chronology is based on..at all.

If harsh could elaborate???

You may find this of use

http://www.thunderbo...78f6ee956a5a420

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Harsh86_Patel, on 28 September 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries. The exact same name could take on an entirely different meaning in different historical epochs. Geographical locations were clearly defined on maps, only with the advent of printing. This made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes in the fields of the military, navigation, education and governance, etc. Before the invention of printed maps, each original map was a unique work of art, both beautiful, non-exact and contradictory.

Mainstream Historians from Oxford say: «stop... everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C. Do you really doubt it?» Yes, we really do. For us this statement is only a point of view that is dominant today. But it is only one of many possible points of view until the very fact of his life and deeds is proven.

In turn, we will also ask some simple questions: where did you get your information? from a textbook? That’s not good enough. Who was the first to say that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.? What book, document and/or manuscript can you quote as a primary source? Who is the author of this source? When and by whom was this primary source written down and where discovered, if you please?

We do not accept «the textbook says so» type of answer as proof. As soon as you dig for proof slightly deeper than the school textbook, the adamant grounds for the totally and utterly dominant point of view suddenly evaporate. The whole world community of professional historians will not be able to come with up irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar EVER existed, be it on paper, papyri, parchment or stone. Same story for ALL great names of Antiquity. The proof is unavailable!


This if true comes across as quite stunning.

A proof of existance of Julius Ceasar not dependant on later written accounts is a Denarius from 44BC bearing his face, name and saying that he is "Perpetual Dictator".
Also, to see exactly the type of "useful work" Fomenko is engaged on, it is only necessary to visit his site and see all the many books with attractive covers for sale. Making $$$ is indeed useful....
And it is interesting to see how big the snowball Helena Blavatsky rolled down the hill so many years ago has become...

And for anybody interested in visiting Fomenko's temple of obscurantism, if only to look at the seductive titles and cover art, then look here. (Russian only)
http://www.chronologia.org/

Edited by Atentutankh-pasheri, 28 September 2012 - 06:47 PM.

[Harsh86_Patel]

The_Spartan, on 28 September 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Let me ask  a layman question.

What is conventional chronology based on?

What is New Chronology Based on?

IMHO, conventional Chronology is based on actual evidences, dating - both absolute and relative.

I don't know what New Chronology is based on..at all.

If harsh could elaborate???

As i said i am new to the topic myself but the 'New chronology' is a stastical mapping of relative events based on actual physically verifiable original historical sources and archeo astronomy etc.The methodology from what i know of it is seems very logical and mathematical and if i can be excused also scientific.There is a huge gap of original sources and hence we rely often on copies to map many historical events which does give a lot of scope for errors of repetitions(from different perspectives) to seep in.I think Fomenko does have a point when he highlights these shortcomings of classical historians who were definitely more prejudiced and ignorant then modern historian and our understanding of many events may be fallacious if we rely on 16th and 18th century sources as an absolute.

[Harsh86_Patel]

Atentutankh-pasheri, on 28 September 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

A proof of existance of Julius Ceasar not dependant on later written accounts is a Denarius from 44BC bearing his face, name and saying that he is "Perpetual Dictator".
Also, to see exactly the type of "useful work" Fomenko is engaged on, it is only necessary to visit his site and see all the many books with attractive covers for sale. Making $$$ is indeed useful....
And it is interesting to see how big the snowball Helena Blavatsky rolled down the hill so many years ago has become...

And for anybody interested in visiting Fomenko's temple of obscurantism, if only to look at the seductive titles and cover art, then look here. (Russian only)
http://www.chronologia.org/

I was just quoting an article posted by someone. But probably what he meant was that the actual life and deeds of Julius Ceasar as we know it may not be based on irrefutable sources.But thanks for the info.