The Chronology Issue

“Human history becomes more and more, a race between education and catastrophe.” – George Orwell, 1920, Outline of History.

“History: Fiction or Science?” series of 29 books is the most explosive tractate on history ever written, proving irrefutably that the timeline of the civilization takes into account only the irrefutably dated non-contradictory events and artifacts barely exceed 1000 years!

St Augustin was quite prescient, saying: “..beware of mathematicians, especially when they speak the truth! “

No matter how unorthodox, every theory these books contain is backed by solid scientific data. The books contain graphs and illustrations, a list of 1534 sources, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the current chronology. The dominating historical discourse was essentially crafted in the XVI century from a somewhat contradictory jumble of sources such as innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts whose originals had vanished in the Dark Ages and the allegedly irrefutable proof offered by late medieval astronomers, resting upon the power of ecclesial authorities. Nearly all of its components are blatantly untrue!

You will be amazed to discover:

– That the consensual chronology universally accepted today and taken for granted is simply wrong;

– That all methods of dating ancient sources and artifacts known today are erroneous or non-exact;

– That there is not a single document that could be dated earlier than the XIth century;

The Author refers to the Middle Ages as Antiquity and proves mutual superimposition of the Second and the Third Roman Empire, both of which become identified as the respective kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Furthermore, Dr.Fomenko asserts that the famous reform of the Occidental Church in the XI century by Pope Gregory Hildebrand was the reflection of the XII century reforms of Byzantine emperor Andronicus, who, in his turn, identified with Jesus Christ. No stone in the history of Antiquity is left unturned. Literally.

Dr. Fomenko et al. are the first to successfully decode the allegedly ancient Egyptian horoscopes painted in Pharaoh’s tombs of the Valley of Kings or cut in stone in Dendera and Esna for centuries considered impenetrable are decoded at last! All dates therein are medieval and pertain to the XI cy a.d. at the earliest. Well, how old is ‘ancient’ Egypt actually?

Volume IV. Why Antiquity and the Dark Ages were to be invented?
The consensual world history was manufactured in Europe in the XVI-XIX centuries with the political agenda of powers of that period based on erroneous clerical chronology elaborated by Kabbalist-numerologist Joseph Justus Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius. By the middle of the XVI century, the prime political agenda of Europe, which reached superiority in Sciences and Technologies but was still inferior militarily to the Evil Empire of Eurasia, was to free Europe. The concerted effort of European aristocracy, black and white Catholic clergy, protestants, humanists, and scientists in the XV-XVII centuries to create and disseminate the fictional Ancient World served this agenda.

NASA research of earth-moon mechanics of late astrophysicist Robert Newton leads Russian mathematicians to a breakthrough in the chronology of world history. This research was an anecdotal byproduct of Russian-American competition in Moon exploration.’ The issue with Chronology” exposes and expounds the numerous in-veracities of the consensual version of history. We are reminded of when the contemporary chronological scale was created and by whom, with the culprits named the XVI-XVII century clergy in charge of all historical matters in that age. The consensual model of history has had prominent critics ever since its creation – AKA Sir Isaac Newton and Jean Hardouin, chief librarian of Louis XIV, the Sun King of France, and collector of the Louvre museum.

All solar and lunar eclipses mentioned in chronicles presumed to be written before the XVI century could not and did not take place at the very time and exact location reported to us by the ancient authors thereof, who did like so much to stress the importance of the event with some phenomena in the sky. Either the authors lied or were wrong, or both. Verdict: either the events took place some other time and some other place, or there was nothing spectacular in the sky at that very moment. “Astronomy vs History” crowns scores of years of meticulous and extensive research performed by the eminent mathematician Anatoly Fomenko and his colleagues.

The Apocalypse – The Book of Revelation is the only apocalyptic document in the New Testament. It does not refer to actual people or events but is an allegory of the spiritual path and the ongoing struggle between good and evil. It contains astronomical and astrological clues relative to its composition. The astronomical aspect of The Apocalypse stayed hidden for centuries. ‘The Apocalypse as seen by Astronomy” has resurrected the astrological, i.e., astronomical ideas contained in The Apocalypse and extracted from it the precise date of its composition on the Isle of Patmos! 

The Classical Age was followed by many centuries of Dark Ages of utter stagnation and decline, with virtually nothing happening but wars and famine and the destruction of priceless ancient monuments. Then, during the Renaissance, the Classical authors reappeared from oblivion, Latin and Greek became resurrected as the intelligentsia Esperanto of the Middle Ages, and numerous manuscripts reappeared from oblivion to be copied, enter wide circulation, and vanish again, never to be found. How preposterous would it be to suggest that there were no Dark Ages to separate Antiquity from the Renaissance – that the “Renaissance” was, in fact, the Naissance of the Western European culture as we know it? The Dark Ages resulted from the creation on the agenda in XV-XVII centuries of a mythical Classical Age that never was by misdating medieval events by hundreds and thousands of years as very ancient ones.

The prime political agenda of Europe that reached by the middle of the XVI century superiority in Sciences and Technologies, but was still inferior militarily to the Evil Empire of Eurasia, was to free Europe. The concerted effort of European aristocracy, black and white Catholic clergy, Protestants, humanists, and scientists in the XVI-XVII centuries to create and disseminate the fictional Ancient World served this agenda perfectly. The European aristocracy, a considerable part of which were noble fugitives from Byzantine and/or the inheritors of Eurasian warlords, supported the myth of the Ancient World to justify its claims to the countries they ruled. The scientists supported the myth of the Ancient World as a safe cover for their research that produced results heretic from the point of view of Christianity.

Russia is at the crossroads of Western and Eastern ways. Again?
Russian history was rewritten completely to help Europe to free itself from the clutches of the Empire of Eurasia. Is Russian history a science at all? Well, one taught in Russian schools was cooked up by learned German historians brought to Russia by Herr Romanov, alias Peter the Great, alias Peter the First. Herren Miller, Bayer, and Schweizer did quite a job of distorting into oblivion all of the pre-Romanov history of the XIV-XVII centuries! As a reformer to the hilt, Peter the Great has literally ruined Russia, lost at least a quarter of its population, tried to break into Europe, moved the capital of Russia from Moscow to St Petersburg, and made Russia an awkward upstart and a laughing stock of Europe.

‘Horde’ in old Russian means armed people, the Order in English, l’Ordre in French, and der Orden in German languages all carry the same meaning. The proto-state of ‘Horde from Pacific to Atlantic’ or Great Tartary was a true imbroglio of colonization, wars, and religions covering most of Eurasia in the XIII-XVIth centuries. The cathedrals, monuments, fortresses, relics, armor, swords, bibles, saints, warlords, artifacts, chronicles, maps, and coins of ‘Horde’ abound but stay mostly misinterpreted. The European part of the Great Horde fell apart into English, French, and German kingdoms in the XIV-XVI centuries. The Great Strife of the Russian part of Eurasia Horde lasted nearly all of the XVIIth century; the Great Tartary disintegrated into Moscuvite, Independent, and Chinese Tartary, ending with the Romanov dynasty usurping the throne of Russia.

It took most of the XVI century and four Czars Ivans the Terribles, the Horribles, the scares to decompose the Empire of Eurasia with a capital of Mosques (Moscow or Moscou) and help the step-by-step escape of Europe from Eurasia. This over-dramatized and figmental Ivan character was actually a collation of FOUR Czars during the Great Strife of the Russian Empire in the XVI-XVII centuries invented by German historians by order of Romanov’s dynasty, which won.
The collision of Godunov and Romanov dynasties, conspiracies of Zacharin and Kurbskiy, 3 false Dimitries as pretenders to the throne, the Polish army occupying the Kremlin, truly tectonic events of orthodox religion, and the disintegration of the Horde. The horror reign of Ivvvan the Terrrible was spun by German historians.

The oversized Tamerlane figure was a collation of two actual historical figures, for the most part, the first of them being Temir Aksak, or the “Iron Cripple,” from the late XIV century, and the second – Sultan Mehmet II (Mohammed II), the famous XV century conqueror who took Constantinople in 1453. Moreover, not a drop of Ghengis blood in either of them. Better yet, the scary figure of Tamerlane idem Timur became the foundation for the consensual ‘biography’ of the greatest warrior of all times, Alexander the Great. The dominating historical discourse in its current state was essentially crafted in the XVI century from a somewhat contradictory jumble of sources literally in line with American philosopher Santana’s definition: « History is a pack of lies about events that never happened told by people who weren’t there.»

‘USA has Issues with British Maps of 18th-century’ analyses in detail the maps of the 1771 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica and concludes that the Northwestern part of the USA was built on remains of Moscuvite Tartary, which according to Britannica of 1771 was the biggest state in the world with capital in Tobolsk! The war of the new Russian Empire of 1773-1775 with Moscuvite Tartary covered up by Catherine II as a raid against peasant rebellion headed by aka Pougatchev (scare in Russian) was actually the final blow in the destruction of Great Tartary. After the war of 1773-1775, the new Russian Empire took over the Urals, Western and Eastern Siberia, Alaska, and Northwestern America, down to San Francisco. ‘Russian’ American territories were too far to control efficiently and were taken over by the USA and British Empire.

Could the Czars read Arabic? Why was the Armour of Russian warlords of the XIV-XVI centuries all covered with Arabic inscriptions from the Quran they could not read? Or could they? Russian Czars Alexander Nevsky and Ivan the Terrible wore helmets with Arabic inscriptions. Were the thousands of helmets, swords, sabers, shields, and armor with Arabic inscriptions kept in the Armoury of Kremlin the rich spoils of war with Arabs, Turks, or the souvenirs of their ambassadors to Russian Czars? No, they are neither the spoils of war of victorious Russian Horde troops nor the presents from subjugated kingdoms and princes. They all were made in Russia by Russian craftsmen of the XIV-XVII centuries. According to Dr. Fomenko et al Russia was in the XIII-XVI, a trilingual state with Russian, Arabic, and Turkic as three official languages. Letters considered Arabic nowadays were used for transcribing Russian words. Russia, Europe, Turkey, and Persia had been part of the same Great = “Mongolian” Empire in XIII – XVI until it disintegrated during the Great Strife.

‘The Issue with British History’ shows, on the one hand, how much shorter than generally presumed it really is, but, on the other hand, it underscores the paramount role Great Britain played in World History. Indeed, England, a small, non-significant, and underpopulated province of the Great Evil Empire of Eurasia, stepped in its own way to greatness in the XVI century. Within 300 years, it became the World Empire that ruled the waves where the sun never set down! Regretfully, British scholars of the XVI-XVII centuries based their historical writings on the consensual chronology of the French Kabbalist Scaliger and Jesuit Petavious. Author’s verdict: British history is most likely to have been extended arbitrarily and substantially. To express the scientific community’s deep gratitude to Oxbridge’s historians for warping the timescale, the book’s cover presents Jesus Christ by Tintoretto, showing the true time of Big Ben. The British scholars have 5 years of scheduled repair of Big Ben to review adequately the History of Great Britain in line with the presented by Dr. Fomenko data.

Why and when were the Crusades? Christianity originated in the Byzantine Empire in XII century as an Oriental Orthodox Catholic religion that went in the XII-XV centuries through the subsequent splits and mutations into the competing Orthodox, Catholic, Western, Eastern, and Oriental Christianity, Mithraism, Judaism, Buddism, and Islam. Crusades of 1189-1192 AD and 1199-1204 AD to Jerusalem-Constantinople were military operations under the banner of Christianity by the followers and relatives of Jesus idem Emperor Andronicus was killed during a religious mutiny. The Crusades ended with the Sack of Constantinople in 1204. Crusades provoked a counter-reaction of Islam that, by the XIII century, started to morph from an early Christian belief into a powerful religious movement, forming a Caliphate that spanned from Middle Asia to Spain. Constantinople was taken by Mehmet the Conqueror in 1453, renamed Istanbul, and Byzantium became a part of the Muslim Ottoman Empire.

Maps & coins point to the Empire of Eurasia. As reflected in cartography, accumulating geographical knowledge is a gradual and irreversible process. Therefore, the more details are contained in a map, the more recent it is. Most allegedly ‘ancient’ maps were produced in the XVI-XVIII centuries because they have details unknown at the moment of their presumed composition. Their age is ‘alleged’ too.

Moreover, all maps with the irrefutable date of the composition before the XIII century show the picture in complete contradiction with consensual history. Before the advent of engraving and printing, any map was more a unique work of art than a reliable geographical instrument for land or maritime orientation. The archaeological findings can’t be dated with the aid of the ancient coinage found on the site. The numismatic dating, i.e., distribution along the time axis, is wholly dependent on erroneous consensual chronology elaborated by Kabbalist Scaliger and perfected by Jesuit Petavius.

Swords cut through the mystery of the Coronation Mantles. Is there a valid explanation for the scores of ancient armor and swords bearing numerous allegedly unreadable inscriptions kept in the museums of Europe? How do we interpret the mysterious signs and symbols on the coronation mantles of Charlemagne and other Kings? How come the allegedly unreadable inscriptions, signs, and symbols start to make sense as soon as Slavonic, Turkic, and Arab alphabets are used to decode them?

Peter, the First alias the Great, has literally ruined Russia, lost at least a quarter of its population, tried to break into Europe, moved the capital of Russia from Moscow to St Petersburg, and made Russia an awkward upstart and a laughing stock of Europe. After spending 3 years in Holland and Germany, Tsar Peter I came home as another man speaking Russian with a German accent and ordered to call him Great from now on. Peter ordered the nobility to cut beards, smoke tobacco, and dance ballet. Better yet, Peter reformed the Orthodox church into total submission. The old Russian Orthodox Church called him Antichrist, so he had to reform it into oblivion. Most of the stubborn Orthodox crowd was simply burnt alive. Once he became the Great One, Peter beheaded the old imperial guard, created the modern army that won, and built a fleet that sank. The king of Sweden, Karl XII, wanted to usurp the Russian throne, too; therefore, Peat Great beat Karl’s army, rumored to be the best of this time, into pulp in Poltava, Ukraine. Peter the Great was a reformer to the hilt. Peter did not quite succeed in his brazen reforms, so he left a Testament ordering the Russian Empire to reconquer Europe.

The quadruple baptism of Russia. Contrary to the official Russian history manufactured in the XVIII century by German historians Bayer, Miller, and Schlezer, which says that Russia’s one and only baptism took place under Prince Vladimir in 986-989 A.D. The priests from Greece got the job of teaching the faith to the pagan Russians. Dr.Fomenko scratched this polished surface and discovered that Russia was baptized four times. The first baptism was by Apostle Andrew, the second performed by Fotius, Patriarch of Czar-Grad “in the reign of the Greek King, Basil of Macedonia, and Ryurik, Great Prince of Russia, with Princes Askold and Dir regnant in Kyiv. The Great Catechesis doesn’t give any dates for either Baptism. Unlike the first two, the third and the fourth baptisms of Russia are dated in the Catechesis. The third one occurred under the Great Princes Olga in 963 A.D. The fourth baptism of Russia is the famous baptism of 989 A.D. under the Great Prince Vladimir.

The Issue with Great Tartary (History: Fiction or Science? Book 14)  Delicate Europe escapes from the Evil Great Russian Tartary! The Great or Russian or Evil Tartary was, according to British Encyclopedia History, edition of 1771, the biggest state in the world! This enormous state has disappeared without a trace from all subsequent editions of Britannica. Clerical mistake? Is it Enigma clouded in mystery? By the middle of the XVIth century, the prime political agenda of Europe, which reached superiority in Sciences and Technologies but was still inferior militarily to the Evil Empire of Eurasia, was to free Europe. The concerted effort of European aristocracy, black and white Catholic clergy, Protestants, humanists, and scientists in the XV-XVII centuries to create and disseminate the fictional Ancient World served this agenda.

‘Ancient’ China is a misunderstanding at best.
NASA research of earth-moon mechanics by astrophysicist Robert Newton leads mathematicians of MSU to a breakthrough in the chronology of civilization, including the Chinese. ‘The Issue with Chinese Astronomy’ is that it can’t be a solid foundation of ‘ancient’ Chinese History anymore. It looks like ‘ancient’ China is a misunderstanding at best. It is presumed to be exceptionally ancient, much more so than European history, and its data are said to be perfectly reliable. The basics of Chinese chronology are believed to be so firm that it is a classic example of an indubitably ancient and reliable chronology. There is a popular misconception about Chinese chronology being based on the “ancient Chinese” astronomical records, which permit dating the events of “ancient” Chinese history without any ambiguity whatsoever. Dr.Fomenko wipes out this misconception.

The history of China was copied from Europe and Byzantium.
The history of China up until the XV century A.D. is, in fact, the history of Europe and the Mediterranean region, particularly Byzantium. Historical chronicles about Europe were transplanted to China by the Jesuits at the earliest in the XVI-XVII century A.D. Today, it is considered that the construction of the Great Wall of China began in the 3rd century B.C., allegedly as protection against northern nomads. The argument that the wall had been repaired during those two thousand years is dubious. Only a rather recent construction is worth being repaired; otherwise, it will become obsolete and just a wreck. This is what we observe in Europe, by the way. Old defensive walls had been demolished, and new, more solid walls were built. For instance, many fortifications in Russia were rebuilt in the XVI century. And yet we are told that the Wall of China, once built, remained unchanged for two thousand years. We are not told that this is a “modern wall recently built on the site of the old one,” but that this is precisely the wall built two thousand years ago. This is extremely strange, not to say more. Read to find out when and against whom the wall was built.

The Issue with Mongols (History Fiction or Science? Book 9)

About the Author: Dr.Fomenko, Anatoly. Born in 1945. Full Member (Academician) of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Full Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Full Member of the International Higher Education Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics, Professor, Head of the Moscow State University Department of Mathematics and Mechanics. Solved the classical Plateau’s Problem from the theory of minimal spectral surfaces. Author of the theory of invariants and topological classification of integrable Hamiltonian dynamical systems. Laureate of the 1996 National Premium in Mathematics of the Russian Federation for a cycle of works on the Hamiltonian dynamic system multitude invariance theory. Author of 180 scientific publications, 26 monographs, and textbooks on mathematics, a specialist in geometry and topology, variational calculus, symplectic topology, Hamiltonian geometry and mechanics, and computational geometry. Author of several books on the development of new empirical-statistical methods and their application to the analysis of historical chronicles and the chronology of Antiquity and the Middle Ages.

 

Exploring History’s Accuracy and Chronology Debates

What if the Roman Empire is a clerical myth? Did the Dark Ages Really Happen? Are there valid reasons to doubt world history or its chronology as it is taught in school and university?

Hmm, this is a complex and unconventional question that challenges mainstream historical consensus. The user seems to be exploring fringe theories about Roman Empire nonexistence and Dark Ages skepticism, possibly influenced by online alternative history circles.

The query has three layered components: questioning Roman Empire’s reality, Dark Ages occurrence, and overall historical chronology validity. Need to address each systematically while maintaining academic rigor without dismissing the user’s curiosity outright.

For the Roman Empire myth claim, the archaeological evidence is overwhelming – from structures like the Colosseum to widespread artifacts. The administrative records alone would require impossibly sophisticated forgery. For Dark Ages skepticism, the term itself is problematic among historians but the period’s reality is well-documented through multiple independent sources.

About historical chronology doubts, this touches on broader epistemological questions of how we verify history. The convergence of dendrochronology, radiocarbon dating, and textual analysis makes large-scale conspiracy theories statistically implausible.

Should structure the response to first acknowledge the question’s philosophical merit, then provide concrete evidence categories for each doubt, while explaining why academic history rejects these theories. Important to maintain neutral tone – not defensive but fact-based.

This is a fascinating and multi-layered question that touches on historical methodology, fringe theories, and the very nature of how we know what we know about the past. Let’s break it down into its core components.

1. Is the Roman Empire a Clerical Myth?

This is the most extreme of the three propositions and is a concept known as “Phantom Time Hypothesis” or the “Illig Hypothesis,” proposed by Heribert Illig in the 1990s.

The Claim: Illig argued that the years 614-911 AD never actually happened. He posits that the Gregorian calendar, introduced in 1582, was based on flawed calculations, and that nearly 300 years of history were invented or misdated. According to this theory, figures like Charlemagne were largely fictional, and the Roman Empire effectively transitioned directly into the High Middle Ages.

The “Evidence” Proponents Cite:

• Lack of Archaeology: A perceived scarcity of well-dated archaeological remains from this period in Europe.
• Architectural Style: The sudden appearance of Romanesque architecture, which they claim looks too much like a continuation of Roman styles, suggesting no “gap.”
• Dating Inconsistencies: Alleged problems with dendrochronology (tree-ring dating) and historical records from other cultures (like China) that don’t perfectly align.

Why Mainstream History Overwhelmingly Rejects This:

1. Independent, Corroborating Histories: The period in question is documented in immense detail by multiple, independent civilizations that had no contact with the European clerical scribes Illig blames.
   • Byzantine Empire: The Eastern Roman Empire has a continuous, well-documented history through this entire period, including detailed reigns of emperors, wars, and religious controversies.
   • Islamic Caliphates: The rise of Islam, the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates, and their extensive historical records, scientific advancements, and architectural projects (like the Dome of the Rock in 691 AD) are all firmly within the “phantom” period.
   • China: The Tang Dynasty was at its cultural and political zenith during these centuries, with meticulously kept records.
2. Hard Science:
   • Dendrochronology: Tree-ring sequences from long-lived trees like bristlecone pines and Irish oaks provide an unbroken, cross-referenced timeline that extends back thousands of years, clearly showing annual growth rings for every single year of the “phantom” period.
   • Astronomical Records: Events like solar eclipses and comet sightings (e.g., Halley’s Comet in 760 AD) are recorded in multiple independent chronicles and align perfectly with astronomical retro-calculations based on our current chronology.
3. Archaeology: While less “visible” than Roman ruins, there is a vast and well-studied archaeological record for the Merovingian and Carolingian periods across Europe, including settlements, coins, weapons, and graves.

Verdict: The Roman Empire is not a clerical myth. The Phantom Time Hypothesis is considered a historical curiosity and a pseudoscience because it requires a global conspiracy spanning multiple continents and cultures for centuries, all while leaving behind a mountain of physical and documentary evidence that contradicts it.

---

2. Did the Dark Ages Really Happen?

This question is more nuanced and depends on what you mean by “Dark Ages.”

The Traditional View (Now Largely Abandoned):
The term “Dark Ages” was coined by the Italian scholar Petrarch in the 14th century to describe the period following the fall of the Western Roman Empire (c. 500-1000 AD). He saw it as a time of cultural, intellectual, and economic decline—a “dark” age compared to the “light” of classical Rome and the Renaissance.

The Modern Scholarly View:
Historians today largely avoid the term “Dark Ages” because it is misleading and pejorative.

• It Wasn’t “Dark” Everywhere: While Western Europe experienced fragmentation, de-urbanization, and a decline in centralized infrastructure and literacy, it was a period of profound transformation and the birth of new kingdoms and identities (e.g., Frankish, Anglo-Saxon).
• Centers of Light: The Byzantine Empire continued to thrive as a direct successor to Rome. The Islamic World experienced a “Golden Age” of science, medicine, and philosophy, preserving and expanding upon classical knowledge.
• The “Carolingian Renaissance”: Even within Western Europe, under Charlemagne, there was a significant revival of art, culture, and learning in the late 8th and early 9th centuries.

So, Did It Happen?
If by “Dark Ages” you mean a period of significant disruption and transformation in Western Europe following the collapse of Roman authority, then yes, it absolutely happened. If you mean a universal, global period of ignorance and stagnation, then no, that is a myth. The event is real, but the label is problematic.

---

3. Are There Valid Reasons to Doubt World History or Its Chronology?

This is the most profound and valid part of your question. The answer is a qualified yes, but not in the way the Phantom Time Hypothesis suggests.

Valid Reasons for Doubt and Scrutiny:

1. Sourcing and Bias: Almost all ancient and medieval history is written by the elite—the winners, the literate, the powerful. The perspectives of the poor, the conquered, women, and slaves are often lost or filtered through a biased lens. Historians constantly work to deconstruct these biases.
2. Gaps in the Record: Huge swathes of history are simply unknown because records were lost or never created. Our picture of the past is a fragmentary puzzle.
3. Chronological Debates: For periods before the widespread use of absolute dating methods (like radiocarbon dating), chronology is often based on king lists and cross-referencing events. There are ongoing scholarly debates, particularly concerning 3rd millennium BC chronologies in Egypt and Mesopotamia, where discrepancies of decades or even a century are argued over. However, these are fine-tuning adjustments, not wholesale rejections of centuries.
4. The “Invented” Nature of History: History is not just a list of facts. It’s a narrative constructed by historians based on the available evidence. Which events are emphasized, which figures are heroes or villains, and what stories are told—these choices change over time as our values and perspectives change. This is a valid reason to be critical of any single, “official” narrative.

Invalid Reasons for Doubt (Pseudohistory):

• Conspiracy Theories: Claims of a coordinated, global effort to hide the “true” past lack evidence and are logistically implausible.
• Ignoring Scientific Evidence: Dismissing dendrochronology, radiocarbon dating, and archaeology without providing a better, testable alternative model.
• “Lack of Proof is Proof”: Arguing that the absence of evidence for a specific claim is evidence for a fantastical alternative.

Conclusion

The chronology of world history, as taught in universities, is not a fragile house of cards. It is a robust structure built on a convergence of evidence from:

• Textual Criticism (comparing multiple manuscripts)
• Archaeology (excavated cities, artifacts, graves)
• Numismatics (coinage with dates and rulers)
• Epigraphy (inscriptions)
• Hard Sciences (radiocarbon dating, dendrochronology, DNA analysis)

While there is always room for healthy skepticism, debate, and the revision of specific details, the core framework of world history—including the existence of the Roman Empire and the general timeline of the post-Roman era—is supported by an overwhelming and interdependent body of evidence. The real task of a historian is not to tear down this framework, but to continually refine our understanding of the complex, messy, and fascinating human stories that happened within it.

 

 

Critics

Also by Anatoly T. Fomenko

(List is non-exhaustive)

• Differential Geometry and Topology
• Plenum Publishing Corporation. 1987. USA, Consultants Bureau, New York, and London.
• Variational Principles in Topology. Multidimensional Minimal Surface Theory
• Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1990.
• Topological variational problems. – Gordon and Breach, 1991.
• Integrability and Nonintegrability in Geometry and Mechanics
• Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1988.
• The Plateau Problem. vols.1, 2
• Gordon and Breach, 1990. (Studies in the Development of Modern Mathematics.)
• Symplectic Geometry.Methods and Applications.
• Gordon and Breach, 1988. Second edition 1995.
• Minimal surfaces and Plateau’s problem. Together with Dao Chong Thi.
• USA, American Mathematical Society, 1991.
• Integrable Systems on Lie Algebras and Symmetric Spaces. Together with V. V. Trofimov. Gordon, and Breach, 1987.
• The geometry of Minimal Surfaces in Three-Dimensional Space. Together with A. A.Tuzhilin
• USA, American Mathematical Society. In: Translation of Mathematical Monographs. vol.93, 1991.
• Topological Classification of Integrable Systems. Advances in Soviet Mathematics, vol. 6
• USA, American Mathematical Society, 1991.
• Tensor and Vector Analysis: Geometry, Mechanics and Physics. – Taylor and Francis, 1988.
• Algorithmic and Computer Methods for Three-Manifolds. Together with S.V.Matveev
• Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands, 1997.
• Topological Modeling for Visualization. Together with T. L. Kunii. – Springer-Verlag, 1997.
• Modern Geometry. Methods and Applications. Together with B. A. Dubrovin, S. P. Novikov
• Springer-Verlag, GTM 93, Part 1, 1984; GTM 104, Part 2, 1985. Part 3, 1990, GTM 124.
• The basic elements of differential geometry and topology. Together with S. P. Novikov
• Kluwer Acad. Publishers, The Netherlands, 1990.
• Integrable Hamiltonian Systems: Geometry, Topology, Classification. Together with A. V. Bolsinov
• Taylor and Francis, 2003.
• Empirical-Statistical Analysis of Narrative Material and its Applications to Historical Dating.
• Vol.1: The Development of the Statistical Tools. Vol.2: The Analysis of Ancient and Medieval
• Records. – Kluwer Academic Publishers. The Netherlands, 1994.
• Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations. Dating Ptolemy’s
• Almagest. Together with V. V Kalashnikov., G. V. Nosovsky. – CRC-Press, USA, 1993.
• New Methods of Statistical Analysis of Historical Texts. Applications to Chronology. Antiquity in the Middle Ages. Greek and Bible History. Vols.1, 2, 3. – The Edwin Mellen Press, the USA. Lewiston.
• Queenston. Lampeter, 1999.
• Mathematical Impressions. – American Mathematical Society, USA, 1990.