Is History Just a Collection of Myths and Legends?

[Evo]

Here is another gem I found at www.talk-history.com[/URL]

[B]History: Fiction or Science?[/B]
Anatoly Fomenko

[COLOR="Blue"]"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."[/COLOR]

another review

[COLOR="Blue"]"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.) "[/COLOR]

[URL]https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/2913621058/?tag=pfamazon01-20[/URL]

Anyone read this book? :bugeye:

I'm tempted to get the book to try to understand what he thinks happened before the year 1,000 AD since it would appear he believes that there is no recorded history prior to that date?

 

[marcus]

Hi Evo,

how did you do that? I saw a PM notice and clicked to read it---instead of a letter it was this post! I'll bet it was me---I clicked twice without noticing.

I can't believe this book is interesting---except for the fun of wallowing in outrageous fabrication.

or else if people are just curious to see how Fomenko argues for his distorted view. Like in a freak sideshow where the guy eats a live chicken.

but on amazon it said people who bought Fomenko also bought these other books some of which might be very readable and interesting:
"Customers who bought this book also bought
The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century by Thomas L. Friedman
Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed by Jared Diamond
History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2 (Chronology) by Anatoly T. Fomenko
The Third Chimpanzee : The Evolution and Future of the Human Animal by Jared Diamond"

The world is flat is apparently about globalization and the shift of wealth, power, technological leadership etc to places like China and India.
the leveling out of the old Atlantic system----thrills and chills of rapid change in the 21st.

 

[Astronuc]

"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."
another review
"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.) "

Hmmm! That book and Fromenko seem awfully suspicious. There seems a lot of other folk and evidence to dispute those dates.

So Charlemagne is a myth?

Charlemagne (ca. 742 or 747 – January 28, 814) (or Charles the Great, in German Karl der Große, in Norwegian Karl den store, in Dutch Karel de Grote, in Latin Carolus Magnus, giving rise to the adjective form "Carolingian"), was king of the Franks from 768 to 814, King of the Lombards since 774, and the renewer of the Western Empire. His dual role as Emperor—Imperator Augustus–and King of the Franks provides the historical link between the Imperial dignity and the Frankish kingdoms and later Germany. Today both France and Germany look to him as a founding figure of their respective countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlemagne

And what of the Byzantine Empire and its influence on Christianity?

The Byzantine Empire is the term conventionally used to describe the Greek-speaking Roman Empire during the Middle Ages, centered at its capital in Constantinople. In certain specific contexts, usually referring to the time before the fall of the Western Roman Empire, it is also often referred to as the Eastern Roman Empire. There is no consensus on the starting date of the Byzantine period. Some place it during the reign of Diocletian (284-305) due to the administrative reforms he introduced, dividing the empire into a pars Orientis and a pars Occidentis. Others place it during the reign of Theodosius I (379-395) and Christendom's victory over paganism, or, following his death in 395, with the division of the empire into western and eastern halves. Others place it yet further in 476, when the last western emperor, Romulus Augustus, was forced to abdicate, thus leaving to the emperor in the Greek East sole imperial authority. In any case, the changeover was gradual and by 330, when Constantine I inaugurated his new capital, the process of Hellenization and Christianization was well underway.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire

Eastern Europe has a lot of history going back before 1000 CE. When I was in Bulgaria, I was given a tour of the National Cathedral and in the basement they have Christian relics which supposedly go back to 300-400 CE. I also toured several monestaries and castles along the imperial route between Rome and Constantinople (Istanbul). The Byzantine influence is everywhere.

How about Alexander the Great and his exploits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_great

Alexander the Great (in Greek Μέγας Αλέξανδρος, transliterated Megas Alexandros; born in Pella, Macedon, on July, 356 BC, died in Babylon, on June 10, 323 BC), King of Macedon 336–323 BC, was arguably the most successful military commander of ancient history, conquering most of the known world before his death. Alexander is also known in Zoroastrian Middle Persian works such as the Arda Wiraz as "the accursed Alexander" due to his conquest of the Persian Empire and the destruction of its capital Persepolis. He is also known in Eastern traditions as Dhul-Qarnayn (the two-horned one), apparently due to an image on coins minted during his rule that seemingly depicted him with the two ram's horns of the Egyptian god Ammon. In north-west India and modern-day Pakistan, he is known as Sikandar-e-Azam (Alexander the Great) and many male children are named Sikandar after him.

Then the records of the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches would seem to dispute Fomenko, not to mention Jewish history and historical records in India, China and Eqypt.

I suppose one could by the book to understand Fomenko's point of view. Is there any background on this person?

 

[arildno]

I assume Mr. Fomenko in his next book will prove that the pyramids in Egypt were built by British aristocrats in the middle of the nineteenth century (probably, there was some tax deduction purposes behind their actions)