This is pretty far fetched and hard to buy but pretty interesting. According to this, a large part of written history didn't actually happen, theres no substantial proof of anything that existed before the 11th century and that history as we know it was actually fabricated between the 11th and the 16th century and refined in the 18-19th century.
"Phantom time hypothesis is a theory developed by Heribert Illig which suggests that the Early Middle Ages (614–911 AD) never occurred, meaning that all artifacts attributed to this time period are from other times and that all historical figures from this time period are outright fabrications. Other people who have written essays in support of the phantom time hypothesis include Hans-Ulrich Niemitz, Christoph Marx, Angelika Müller, Uwe Topper and Manfred Zeller. The vast majority of historians believe this theory to be incorrect, as all cited evidence can be considered circumstantial. As such, it is generally considered to be pseudohistory."
This theory proclaims that English, Egyptian, Chinese, Japanese, Greece, Roman and all other ancient written histories are based on documentation, texts, and artifacts that are made by people and that which are refered to as 'primary sources' can't be proven to be 'objectively true'. That notable places of history, the Pyramids, the Great Wall, the Colosseum, castles and other ancient ruin are dated based on speculation, apparently carbon dating can have a margin of error that's plus or minus 1500 years. 1500 years. That's a huge margin or error. Most ancient architecture doesn't have any evidence proving its older than 1000 years. Much as mythologies were developed by imagination so allegedly were the milestone events of history. It also claims as proof of this theory that some histories of different origins contradict each other. That certain events could not have happened if other events took place.
All documents of history is asserted to be believed that it was created much more recent than what is written, and all events this is written happened at a different time, or are outright fabrications.
There are gaps in written history of which there is no accountable evidence of what happened or who existed. Theres an especially largely unknown part within the Middle Ages between 614 - 911 BC of which hardly any physical evidence from that era exists. They claim that the Roman Catholic church had forged written documents of this era of history and had this embraced by society during the medieval times to be believed. Allegedly the Roman Catholic church may have re-written several important parts of written history and manipulated sacred historical documents that the world uses as a reference, like the Bible for example.
In 1582, the Gregorian calendar we still use today was introduced by Pope Gregory XIII to replace the outdated Julian calendar which had been implemented in 45 BC. It was created to correct a 10 day discrepancy in the Julian calender. According to the new calender, and the re-calculation of history, there has been 1600 years that passed since the Julian calender started, but this allocation of years had accounted for a 13 day discrepancy, not ten. If it was only a 10 day error it would have only accounted for 1200 years. So with the creation of this new calender, that we still use today, developed an extra 300 years on our timeline. There is evidence showing other large gaps of history extending a few hundred years and parts of history that overlap, like a given rulers reign would overlap another rulers era of the same area and time in the world. This could not happen.
All the evidence we use today to account for history is based upon accumulated written documents from around the world that is no more than 1000 years old. All these documents, texts, and artifacts tell stories of events in history that happened hundreds of years before they were actually documented, that these evens were passed down as stories and fables and written hundreds of years after they actually happened.
There is no actual legitimate proof that Jesus Christ, Julius Caesar, Genghis Khan, and Alexander the Great existed when history claims they have, or that they even existed at all. There has been evidence that documented time frames that were identified by the reign of a specific 'ruler' we're extended by their history writing scholars who depicted them to have a longer, more credible lineage. Chinese Dynasty's, Egyptian and Roman eras may have been extended a few hundred years to add power and significance to its history.
Basically, written history from the last 2500 years is largely based on speculation and circumstance. History was written by scholars, not scientists, to roughly apply the famous events of history to our new Gragorian calender. There was was no science of defining historical accuracy before the 1800's, and even today its hard to determine the age of anything above 1000 years.
Biggest fallacy in world history ever, if this is true.
One of the arguements that allegedly prove against this outlandish claim are the determining of when eclipses occur.
"*Eclipses allow the calculation of the historical rate of rotation of the Earth and match the predicted lengthening of the day due to tidal effects of the moon with high precision. Even millisecond errors in the calculation would have accumulated and resulted in the eclypse being observed thousands of kilometers away from the reported location. Many independent historical eclypse reports going back as far as 700 BCE are in agreement with the traditional historical timeline"
So apparently eclipses that have been reported throughout history sync up with when and where they scientifically assumed to have happened.
It's crazy to think but the historical events that shaped society and civilization, including those which created religions and other monuments of the world, may not have even happened.
This is my life
- ► 2011 (23)
- ▼ 2010 (25)
- ► 2009 (22)