Category: Egyéb kategória

Any “phantom time theory” seems to be unbelievable and unacceptable. This is probably why even those who like to deal with history show little interest in the suspected but not yet proved and accepted inaccuracy of our AD chronology.

Or more precisely formulated, in the confusion of the AD time reckoning.

(AD stands for Anno Domini, see Abbreviations. Chronology and time reckoning has different meanings: see Explanations. Sometimes I use “AD system” or “AD time” as synonyms for AD time reckoning.)

This lack of interest is understandable since professional historians emphasise that the open questions about the more than 2000 years old AD era have long since been resolved.

The only exception to this disinterest is Heribert ILLIG’s book on the falsification of our chronology, “The Invented Middle Ages “., generally called the most famous “Phantom Time Theory“. 

It is a well-known historical fact that there were many forged documents in earlier times. The usual purpose was to retroactively prove the origin of specific claims (e. g., inheritance and property rights). ILLIG, too, based much of his work on the existence of a considerable number of forged documents.

In my opinion, ILLIG’s fiction became famous mainly because science (instead of refuting it with plausible counterarguments) put the stamp of “conspiracy theory “, short “CT“, on it. In our time, many people like fiction (although many also consider it fact), e. g. science fiction, (sci-fi), and even conspiracy theories. CTs are based on accusing certain groups of “misdirection”, “secrecy”, and “stealth”. Undoubtedly, this also finds a strong emphasis on ILLIG’s theory.

(As an aside, my general opinion on CTs is that people usually make them up after the fact. However, not entirely without reason. Because throughout history, there has always been a lot of misdirection and “manipulation” to enforce an interest. I call this a “conspiracy practice”. Since the manipulated cannot understand what has happened and why and are reluctant to admit that they have been misled, they invent a conspiracy theory for the unpleasant situation that has arisen spontaneously, as the result of many manipulations, not necessarily coordinated in a conspiration).

The main difference between science fiction and CT is that sci-fi is characterised by rational or seemingly logical reasoning. I enjoy sci-fi, but CTs don’t make me angry either because I tend to think they might also have a kernel of truth like the origins of legends. Despite my indulgent attitude, I have so far found all fiction and conspiracy theories I have read, including ILLIG’s theory, unacceptable.

Nevertheless, my present hypothesis is a distant relative of ILLIG’s theory and originated on the fringes of these two “fashionable genres”. I classify my own “invention” in the genre of “historical fiction “, as I mentioned above.

It resembles science fiction because one of the definitions of sci-fi says that it “deals with unrecognised problems and offers a rational solution to them.” My writing offers a rational, astronomical solution to suspected historical issues that science does not recognise. At the same time, my hypothesis can also be considered a conspiracy theory, although I only touch on misdirection, secrecy, and camouflage.

I state: 
A significant miscalculation of AD time cannot be ruled out! 
I claim that the possible error in the AD time reckoning is: 
Insertion of 220 years of historical events 
that never took place! 
A "confusion" of the AD time by 220 years is possible!

I use the term “confusion” because the word may mean both intentional and accidental mistakes. Moreover, the most significant event of the AD time reckoning has been shifted in the opposite direction than the other ones, and this bidirectional falsehood is a “confusion” indeed.

The above statement is, of course, only a hypothesis until proven by scientists in the fields concerned.    

(This is why I ask the reader to put my “feverishly exploratory” statements, even definite statements, in conditional mode. Unless my hypothesis can be proven by scientific rigour, I have written a scenario on systematically constructing complex historical fiction. While entertaining myself, I learned a lot about history and astronomy!)

Although it starts with an ABSTRACT, the present hypothesis is not a scientific work. I summarise my observations in a simplified form, hoping that this simplification results in better clarity. Even though what I have to say is complex.

Scientists can regard my view as fiction alone because I am not an expert in the concerned fields, but only an amateur, a computer engineer interested in calendars, history, and time reckoning. But the abstract is not intended only for experts who happen to stumble across my blog; it can be helpful for any reader to decide if he is interested in this topic.

At my age, I would be particularly pleased to be accused of having too vivid an imagination because I follow Mark Twain: “You can’t depend on your eyes when your imagination is out of focus.”

Having come across a seemingly impossible hypothesis, I may shock the esteemed reader. Although my theory refers to long past times, it also causes the present. Therefore, I hope it will provide new ideas for those interested in history and astronomy, whether my fiction is true or just a reflection of my imagination.

I can see that my hypothesis is extraordinarily bold, and my imagination is so fierce that only an amateur may propose such a hypothesis. Already by the hint of a similar theory, any respected authority could lose its scientific reputation.

The AD time reckoning used today 
was verified astronomically. 
So, I want to show that exactly on an astronomical basis: 
“Another historical chronology” seems to be possible.

In this study, I try to present my hypothesis understandably but also concisely. At the same time, I tried to check some historical data on an astronomical basis. Precise astronomy as a rational means of proving the hypothesis may offer a chance to get some experts thinking about the new year numbers.

This “intermediate way” is not easy because the average reader might have little knowledge about the necessary astronomical basics. Therefore, the reader can skip the astronomical details, and it is sufficient to understand the gist of the text accompanying them. And for readers interested in background information, there is the possibility of instantly accessing the underlined references in the text by screen-clicking. However, I would prefer to recommend that you study the details afterwards. It may be sufficient to use the buttons Abbreviations and Explanations when reading on screen.

There are also some less essential references in the text to give sources (especially the source of images), which cannot be clicked. Some of the attached pictures and figures can be enlarged by clicking.

I consider the AD time reckoning only as a year scale in which an old historical course, i. e. a more extended period, could also be wrongly classified.

Of course, it would never have occurred to me to change the AD system, which has been familiar for a long time! Therefore, I remain with the AD time system and assign a new AD year or date to certain old events. To facilitate the distinction, my “new AD years“, which are proposed in the context of my hypothesis, are marked with the equivalent year notation CE (Common Era) for AD and BCE (Before CE) for BC. (See Abbreviations, or Common Era – Wikipedia)

Shortly, my hypothesis is an imagination 
on the one side 
but is an invention based on astronomical facts 
on the other side. 
The decision is yours whether you see my hypothesis as 
“a novel theory of phantom time.” 
or 
“a novella on phantom time theory”.

Of course, the reader is right to ask how an amateur can have the courage to make such a far-reaching hypothesis.

The following thought-provoking quotations and my comments on them are my attempt to “explain” my audacity:

Quote from the English historian-politician Edward H. “Ted” Carr (1892-1982):

“The belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy.”

My comment:

-Therefore, history writing is inherently subjective, even according to the known and respected historian. Thus, even an amateur can fantasise about history or theorise about falsifying it in the past.

Napoleon Bonaparte, Churchill, Dan Brown, and others said:

“History is written by the victors”.

My comment:

– Indeed, the victors rewrite past events to make their “own history” seem better.

– But the chronology and a given time reckoning should be written by the stars of the heavens!

“Chronology is the backbone of history “, the old saying goes. But there is no consensus among historians on the absolute historical chronology. The fitting of the quasi-known “relative chronological fragments” is in many cases questionable. This applies mainly to older (ancient) events, e. g. “as many Egyptian chronologies as there are Egyptologists”.

There is already a seemingly clear consensus in the chronology of the last 2000 years of European history, reflected in the AD time reckoning.

It is possible, however, that this mirror is still curved!

The old books of Venerable Bede provided the impetus for the practical introduction of today’s Anno Domini time reckoning. So I bow first and foremost to Bede’s life-work and initiative.

I remember with thanks the words of encouragement of my friends Tamás Gyorgyevics and Gábor Szalay.

I greatly appreciate the comments of my friend László Fabó, electrical engineer and the operational chairman of the Philosophical Discussion Group in Budapest, whose notes have made my message clearer.

To the bests of my remembrance belongs the gesture of Sándor Szekeres. Long before the birth of my hypothesis, he had conjured up on his screen the star Regulus, which is one of the astronomical cornerstones of both his and my theory as well.

Many thanks to Zoltán Hunnivári for his helpful comments in support of my hypothesis. He did it despite the decades of work he had put into his own theory, which is partly similar to mine. His theory and method of working were very stimulating for me.

I would like to express my special thanks to my astronomer friend Albert Gesztesi for his valuable professional and literary advice, especially for verifying my initial astronomical data and findings.

I am grateful to my friend Ingeborg Burger-Balogh for having revised my German version of the text with such care that she even contributed to the clarifying addition of the original Hungarian text.

Finally, although I wish I had done it first, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Böbe (Dr Erzsébet Urban), my wife, who has tolerated my frequent and lengthy browsing of books and screens with understanding and patience.

Chronology versus time reckoning

Chronology is the schedule of historical events, and its essence is the relative order of events. The chronology can be expressed by the time distance of the events, too, without dates, without giving the calendar years according to any time reckoning. For example: ‘The thirty-year-old emperor attacked our country, but our king, who was 15 years older in the twentieth year of his reign, defeated the emperor in a duel”. From this description, a sequence of events can be constructed.

Time reckoning is the system of time calculation beginning from a known or imagined historical or astronomical event.

A given chronology can be expressed correctly in different time reckoning systems. For example, the sequence of the events of a given decade of our AD system is the same in an old Chinese or in a younger Islamic time reckoning system. Only the dates belonging to the events become different in another time reckoning system.

Gregory’s dilemma: (as described by the blogger)

If our calendar were correct, Pope Gregory XIII could not have corrected the Julian calendar by deleting ten days when he introduced the Gregorian calendar in AD 1582. He would have had to omit 13 days. The vernal equinox (short VEQ; see Abbreviations) moves back one day every 128 years in the Julian calendar. The backwards shift would have been 13 days in 1626 years (45BC-AD1582), while the deleted ten calendar days correspond to only 1280 elapsed years.

Conjunction:

When two planets, as seen from Earth, appear to be so close that they “overlap” (super conjunction), or at least appear very close, the difference in their hour angle or longitudinal ecliptic coordinates is/are within 1 degree. Conjunction (astronomy) – Wikipedia

Metonic cycle (lunar cycle):

This cycle means that a particular lunar phase, e.g., the new moon, falls only after 19 years on the same day of the year, concerning a fixed point of the year, such as the astronomical VEQ-day. The Metonic cycle was the basis of the solar year correction of some lunar calendars in ancient times. Metonic cycle – Wikipedia

Solar cycle: (as a calendar cycle)

The period of 28 years after which, in the Julian calendar, the weekdays of a 366-day leap year return to the same date. After 28 years, the leap year calendars are identical to each other. The 365-day standard years are more often similar. Solar cycle (calendar) – Wikipedia

Nisan: (also called Nissan)

Nisan is the first month in the “religious” Jewish calendar. It lasts 30 days. The beginning of the month of Nisan falls in the period from mid-March to mid-April, as the Jewish calendar is lunisolar. Nisan – Wikipedia

Roman Era: 

753BC (founding year of Rome) – AD476 (fall of the Western Roman Empire) or 533BCE – 696CE, according to this study. Consequently, the last period of the Roman Era is the Western Roman Empire (27BC – AD476 or AD194 – 696CE, according to this study).

Middle-Ages:

AD476 – AD1492 (discovery of America by Christopher Columbus) or 696CE – 1492CE, according to this study.

Dark Middle Ages: about the first 300 years of the Middle Ages.

Note: The period of the Middle Ages or the Dark Ages is a subject of discussion among historians and might change country by country, depending on the history of the given land.

Parthia or Parthian Empire: (also named as Arsacid Empire)

247BC – AD228 as accepted today, or 27BCE – 448CE according to this study. The Parthian Empire defeated the Seleucids and often the Romans and occupied today’s Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel (Galilea).

Seleucids, Seleucid Empire:

312BC- 63BC as accepted today, or BC312 – 158CE according to this study. The Seleucid Empire was one of the Hellenistic successor states formed after the death of Alexander the Great. The empire initially included Bactria, Persia, Mesopotamia, Media, Babylonia, Asia Minor, Syria, and Palestine.