The First Millenium Largely Didn't Exist, And 1000AD A Huge Catastrophe Killed Most People

[ecstatichamster]

I've been reading these essays and the last one is based mostly on the brilliant Gunnar Heinsohn

How Fake is Roman Antiquity?
how Roman history was written by progagandist Italians in the early renaissance

How Fake is Church History?
how church history (Roman Catholic history) is fake and was written around the same time

and the last installment today:
How Long Was the First Millenium?
how 700 years of supposed history is really a nothingburger, the 300AD and 900AD are approximately contiguous with the rest made up.

And..., around 1000 AD there was a terrible catastrophe, perhaps a comet strike to earth or a huge volcano, and it killed many, many people everywhere in Europe and Asia.

Dr. Heinsohn spells out the evidence in this exceptional lecture:

 

[TheSir]

And..., around 1000 AD there was a terrible catastrophe, perhaps a comet strike to earth or a huge volcano, and it killed many, many people everywhere in Europe and Asia.

In addition to, or instead of the black death of the 1300s?

 

[ecstatichamster]

In addition to, or instead of the black death of the 1300s?

this is all between 300 - 1000AD roughly

the rewrites/creation of antiquity and ancient history were done around the early Renaissance.

 

[burtlancast]

Quite the erudite scholar we have here:

"Heinsohn suggested that Hitler wished to erase—physically, intellectually and spiritually—the meaning and heritage of Judaism and Jewish ethics from Germany and its European allies by literally destroying the Jews as a people. In so far Heinsohn explained the Holocaust:[41] as an attempt by Hitler and his Nazi cohorts to wipe out the memory and the idea of Jewish ethics.[42][43]"

Anyway, it's always the same story with these people (Velikovsky, Heinsohn, ...) : you can't prove them wrong as it would require proving a negative, which can never be done.

Let these people hallucinate for their heart's content, and hope no one lost precious time they could have used for much better things.

 

[TheSir]

this is all between 300 - 1000AD roughly

the rewrites/creation of antiquity and ancient history were done around the early Renaissance.

Very interesting notion. I'm vaguely familiar with the claim that our recent history is more compact than we assume, but never looked it into further. Sounds like a fascinating rabbit hole to dive into.

 

[ecstatichamster]

Quite the erudite scholar we have here:

"Heinsohn suggested that Hitler wished to erase—physically, intellectually and spiritually—the meaning and heritage of Judaism and Jewish ethics from Germany and its European allies by literally destroying the Jews as a people. In so far Heinsohn explained the Holocaust:[41] as an attempt by Hitler and his Nazi cohorts to wipe out the memory and the idea of Jewish ethics.[42][43]"

Anyway, it's always the same story with these people (Velikovsky, Heinsohn, ...) : you can't prove them wrong as it would require proving a negative, which can never be done.

Let these people hallucinate for their heart's content, and hope no one lost precious time they could have used for much better things.

he may not be right on that, but he may be right on history. It may not be easily falsifiable either, just as many theories aren't easily falsifiable.

There are many people who have observed these historical anomalies and they are quite easy to spot when you travel to Rome.

 

[lvysaur]

Very interesting notion. I'm vaguely familiar with the claim that our recent history is more compact than we assume

I find this interesting as it's the exact opposite of what is usually claimed in these circles (that human history is much LONGER than historians think)
The two claims don't really contradict each other since this only concerns 0 - 1000 AD.

 

[ecstatichamster]

I find this interesting as it's the exact opposite of what is usually claimed in these circles (that human history is much LONGER than historians think)
The two claims don't really contradict each other since this only concerns 0 - 1000 AD.

yes. I think history is much longer than we think, and I think there is merit to a lot of this 0-1000AD thinking and wrt the creation myth of the Roman empire.

 

[michael94]

yes. I think history is much longer than we think, and I think there is merit to a lot of this 0-1000AD thinking and wrt the creation myth of the Roman empire.

We discussed in one thread in the past I made about the Mongols. Or you can also do a forum search for "Fomenko". Burtlan is right about Fomenko being a disinfo agent, and I dont believe his "New Chronology", but he is good at calling into question the conventional history. I guess Fomenko is there to steer that sort of discussion to the way that he or whoever is directing him wants.

Question For You All Regarding The "Mongols" ( History Buffs Welcome )

I dont know if I agree with everything I posted here years ago but theres the thread

 

[TheBeard]

this is all between 300 - 1000AD roughly

the rewrites/creation of antiquity and ancient history were done around the early Renaissance.

What would their purpose be for rewriting history?

 

[jb116]

@ecstatichamster you should look into The Jesuits. They were/are essentially the Romans. The exaggerated Roman empire was basically them building their actual empire you see running the show now. Their hijacking of the history of Christianity and the Church was being established to run in accordance with their plans. Most if not all of major historical events run by them including but not limited to Sept 11, Event 201, Agenda 21, The Great Reset, etc. Gates, Schwab, Cuomo, Fauchi, Newsom, and the list goes on, all Jesuit educated. "Order of Chaos" "Divide and Conquer" "Out of Many, One" "All Roads Lead to Rome" ...where do you think these came from.

"Jesus" was a variation of Hail Zeus! It was their mockery while venerating their Jupiter and Saturn gods.

 

[lvysaur]

They were/are essentially the Romans. The exaggerated Roman empire was basically them building their actual empire you see running the show now. Their hijacking of the history of Christianity and the Church was being established to run in accordance with their plans. Most if not all of major historical events run by them including but not limited to Sept 11, Event 201, Agenda 21, The Great Reset, etc. Gates, Schwab, Cuomo, Fauchi, Newsom, and the list goes on, all Jesuit educated. "Order of Chaos" "Divide and Conquer" "Out of Many, One" "All Roads Lead to Rome" ...where do you think these came from.

"Jesus" was a variation of Hail Zeus! It was their mockery while venerating their Jupiter and Saturn gods.

interesting view. Is this your own, or is this a popular and already established paradigm?

 

[GelatinGoblin]

@ecstatichamster you should look into The Jesuits. They were/are essentially the Romans. The exaggerated Roman empire was basically them building their actual empire you see running the show now. Their hijacking of the history of Christianity and the Church was being established to run in accordance with their plans. Most if not all of major historical events run by them including but not limited to Sept 11, Event 201, Agenda 21, The Great Reset, etc. Gates, Schwab, Cuomo, Fauchi, Newsom, and the list goes on, all Jesuit educated. "Order of Chaos" "Divide and Conquer" "Out of Many, One" "All Roads Lead to Rome" ...where do you think these came from.

"Jesus" was a variation of Hail Zeus! It was their mockery while venerating their Jupiter and Saturn gods.

Eh unfounded... I have however heard about the similarities between Astrology and Christianity. The Son = Sun ... Helios, "Lazy o" in English or something like that. 12 Apostles 12 astrological signs of the zodiac. "...twelve sons of Jacob were representative of the twelve signs of the zodiac and that the personality traits of each son were used to describe each sun sign we know today." And that the Christian G*D is zeus. Doesn't sound too interesting as a narrative also, may be relevent to the discussion?

 

[jb116]

interesting view. Is this your own, or is this a popular and already established paradigm?

It's definitely not popular but I didn't make it up. For me it's been a combination of history courses in the mid 90s, and the observance of the esoteric occult practice of gematria. That's all up to the individual however, in piecing it together and the interpretation. It's easy for example, to "reach" in order to string together a narrative.

But there is information out there. Look at "Corona Virus is a Jesuit/ Knights of Malta Psyop."
Knights of Templar is another thing you should look into. They ruled the early banking systems, and they are in charge now. They're just known by this other name now .
There is this too: Who Really Owns Your Gold: How the Jesuits Use Gold Economics to Control Humanity
Also, look up their "Extreme Oath" is sort of a give away in terms of their maniacal mentality. When they say things like:

...promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race.

The give-away in the modern day is seen in the fact that most of the scheming, nefarious individuals behind these plots like convid are, you guessed it: jesuit educated.

 

[yerrag]

It's definitely not popular but I didn't make it up. For me it's been a combination of history courses in the mid 90s, and the observance of the esoteric occult practice of gematria. That's all up to the individual however, in piecing it together and the interpretation. It's easy for example, to "reach" in order to string together a narrative.

But there is information out there. Look at "Corona Virus is a Jesuit/ Knights of Malta Psyop."
Knights of Templar is another thing you should look into. They ruled the early banking systems, and they are in charge now. They're just known by this other name now .
There is this too: Who Really Owns Your Gold: How the Jesuits Use Gold Economics to Control Humanity
Also, look up their "Extreme Oath" is sort of a give away in terms of their maniacal mentality. When they say things like:

The give-away in the modern day is seen in the fact that most of the scheming, nefarious individuals behind these plots like convid are, you guessed it: jesuit educated.

I don't trust most, if not all, of these religious orders and even the religions themselves. Catholics are the usual scapegoats, but it goes farther than that. Even Protestants, and worse, Evangelicals. If you look at the Mormons, it was founded by a fraudster. Yet it did not produce bad seed in that their faithful are basically good people, as they share the same tenets with Christians (they aren't considered Christians if they deny the divinity of Christ), which basically at its core is humanistic. Which basically means for me one does not have to be a Christian to practice a life in accord with fairness and towards towards the common good. The civilization of China did not grow centered upon a deity or a set of deities, but based on Confucianist and Taoist principles, devoid of a deity.

Religions are very often set up to support a narrative. Oftentimes, it is built around a narrative of the ruler being from the lineage of Gods. Such is the case of Remus and Remulus, who basically, if I'm not wrong, the founders of Rome, and who would have historians favoring the Roman Empire, pre-Christianity, extol their divine origin. You can see traces of this in Greek mythology.

If Joseph Smith were a fraudster, why can't Jesus be a fraudster himself, or part of a fraud, right? And if such were the case, then it's implausible that on the original fraud, many frauds or lies would have to be built upon this fraud to support this fraud. Christianity is really based on the account of Jewish writers of the Old Testatment and the New Testament. The Old Testament was a book of Judaism (it's not "the book," as there are other books they base their belief on, and there's also the oral tradition, which is passed from rabbi to rabbi intergenerationally), but this was for basically for their god, and their god is not the god of other peoples. You have to be Jewish to believe in their god. This basically excludes all gentiles from sharing any religious and manipulable commonality with the Jews.

So I would proffer that the mythology of Christianity was invented in order to makes gentiles share in the interests of Jews, with the idea that the Jewish god is so generous and so loving that he not only offered salvation to Jews in the afterlife, but also to non-Jews, and thus is born the New Testament. The idea of an afterlife- of a heaven and a hell - allows for the softening of the gentiles by the idea of a god that metes out punishment in the afterlife, and with this idea the faithful has to work within a certain box - playing by the rules so to speak - and if there are rule breakers, they may rob, cheat, lie, and murder - they can get away with it in this life - but the faithful will be content with being abused by the rule-breakers (hence martyrs and their persecutors - the Cross, the martyrs eaten by lions in the Coliseum) because in the afterlife there is a god that metes out justice. So, my religion, entire classes of believers can be subjugated to whoever runs the empire. And this is probably why Christianity became the religion of Rome, and the religion creates 2 classes of people - people playing by the rules and who can turn the other cheek - and people who slaps both cheeks with impunity, and rule!

As you can see here, if one does not have such a religion, if one won't allow to turn the other cheek, then there is no other class that would get away with impunity with murder, and be their leader, or leader class, would there?

For me, it is entirely plausible that the Roman Catholic Church would have to reinvented when after a century (or 700 years if we count from when Christianity was adopted by Rome as its religion), and that around 1000 AD a lot of inventions and structures and proofs from antiquity would have to be invented to make the narrative of Christ more authentic. And maybe that also had to do with the Catholic Church's ransacking of Constantinople. Perhaps a lot of books and writings were in Constantinople and that they were burned so that a counter-narrative would not be possible?

 

[Ras]

I don't trust most, if not all, of these religious orders and even the religions themselves. Catholics are the usual scapegoats, but it goes farther than that. Even Protestants, and worse, Evangelicals. If you look at the Mormons, it was founded by a fraudster. Yet it did not produce bad seed in that their faithful are basically good people, as they share the same tenets with Christians (they aren't considered Christians if they deny the divinity of Christ), which basically at its core is humanistic. Which basically means for me one does not have to be a Christian to practice a life in accord with fairness and towards towards the common good. The civilization of China did not grow centered upon a deity or a set of deities, but based on Confucianist and Taoist principles, devoid of a deity.

Religions are very often set up to support a narrative. Oftentimes, it is built around a narrative of the ruler being from the lineage of Gods. Such is the case of Remus and Remulus, who basically, if I'm not wrong, the founders of Rome, and who would have historians favoring the Roman Empire, pre-Christianity, extol their divine origin. You can see traces of this in Greek mythology.

If Joseph Smith were a fraudster, why can't Jesus be a fraudster himself, or part of a fraud, right? And if such were the case, then it's implausible that on the original fraud, many frauds or lies would have to be built upon this fraud to support this fraud. Christianity is really based on the account of Jewish writers of the Old Testatment and the New Testament. The Old Testament was a book of Judaism (it's not "the book," as there are other books they base their belief on, and there's also the oral tradition, which is passed from rabbi to rabbi intergenerationally), but this was for basically for their god, and their god is not the god of other peoples. You have to be Jewish to believe in their god. This basically excludes all gentiles from sharing any religious and manipulable commonality with the Jews.

So I would proffer that the mythology of Christianity was invented in order to makes gentiles share in the interests of Jews, with the idea that the Jewish god is so generous and so loving that he not only offered salvation to Jews in the afterlife, but also to non-Jews, and thus is born the New Testament. The idea of an afterlife- of a heaven and a hell - allows for the softening of the gentiles by the idea of a god that metes out punishment in the afterlife, and with this idea the faithful has to work within a certain box - playing by the rules so to speak - and if there are rule breakers, they may rob, cheat, lie, and murder - they can get away with it in this life - but the faithful will be content with being abused by the rule-breakers (hence martyrs and their persecutors - the Cross, the martyrs eaten by lions in the Coliseum) because in the afterlife there is a god that metes out justice. So, my religion, entire classes of believers can be subjugated to whoever runs the empire. And this is probably why Christianity became the religion of Rome, and the religion creates 2 classes of people - people playing by the rules and who can turn the other cheek - and people who slaps both cheeks with impunity, and rule!

As you can see here, if one does not have such a religion, if one won't allow to turn the other cheek, then there is no other class that would get away with impunity with murder, and be their leader, or leader class, would there?

For me, it is entirely plausible that the Roman Catholic Church would have to reinvented when after a century (or 700 years if we count from when Christianity was adopted by Rome as its religion), and that around 1000 AD a lot of inventions and structures and proofs from antiquity would have to be invented to make the narrative of Christ more authentic. And maybe that also had to do with the Catholic Church's ransacking of Constantinople. Perhaps a lot of books and writings were in Constantinople and that they were burned so that a counter-narrative would not be possible?

Imagine the extremities of logic required to argue the untenable position that countless thousands across millennia have voluntarily allowed themselves to suffer persecution, imprisonment, torture, ruin, loss, ridicule, and murder, all for an incredible hoax fabricated by the most reviled people in the history of mankind. It is commonly attested by faithful sources, believing and unbelieving, that those who walked with Jesus Christ so believed him to be the Son of God that they all voluntarily gave up the entirety of the remainder of their lives to labor, suffer, and die for him.

 

[yerrag]

Imagine the need to believe all that because that is what the historians say as if history and religion are written to be factual and not to craft a narrative that favors the powers that be, be it the official ruler or the power behind the throne.

So Remus and Romulus are raised by a wolf, and that they are descended from a god, and they founded Rome, and they are of noble blood because of their provenance, and that is to be believed because the historian walked among them.

Similar logic applies as to the Son of God, and to the veracity of the Bible, as well as to the Hollywood production called the Holocaust.

Just as the newspapers that reported on the Holocaust bear that to be true just as the media bears witness to the legitimacy of the recent presidential election - no fraud- because the masters, the inventors of the chosen people narrative, says so thru Twitter, Facebook, and all the broadcast media.

 

[Nicky]

Don't forget the inquisition lasted six hundred years.
Sars 2 Covid 19 anyone?

NK

 

[GelatinGoblin]

Imagine the need to believe all that because that is what the historians say as if history and religion are written to be factual and not to craft a narrative that favors the powers that be, be it the official ruler or the power behind the throne.

So Remus and Romulus are raised by a wolf, and that they are descended from a god, and they founded Rome, and they are of noble blood because of their provenance, and that is to be believed because the historian walked among them.

Similar logic applies as to the Son of God, and to the veracity of the Bible, as well as to the Hollywood production called the Holocaust.

Just as the newspapers that reported on the Holocaust bear that to be true just as the media bears witness to the legitimacy of the recent presidential election - no fraud- because the masters, the inventors of the chosen people narrative, says so thru Twitter, Facebook, and all the broadcast media.

I think about 1-3 million Jews died in the Holocaust, but it did happen. Rest of the 2 - 2.5 Million via mobile death squads and whatever. In total probably 4-5 million Jews died. Starvation too... Whatever else, disease. Why do you think it did not happen to the scale portrayed? I don't consider this "Holocaust denial" as it is simply discussing it. Luckily the forum is very open. On a nutrition forum so many different topics and people, very interesting.

 

[Ras]

Imagine the need to believe all that because that is what the historians say as if history and religion are written to be factual and not to craft a narrative that favors the powers that be, be it the official ruler or the power behind the throne.

So Remus and Romulus are raised by a wolf, and that they are descended from a god, and they founded Rome, and they are of noble blood because of their provenance, and that is to be believed because the historian walked among them.

Similar logic applies as to the Son of God, and to the veracity of the Bible, as well as to the Hollywood production called the Holocaust.

Just as the newspapers that reported on the Holocaust bear that to be true just as the media bears witness to the legitimacy of the recent presidential election - no fraud- because the masters, the inventors of the chosen people narrative, says so thru Twitter, Facebook, and all the broadcast media.

Pathetic. No one lives and dies for Romulus or Remus. People along the course of history didn't live and die for Jesus Christ and make thousands of copies of his scriptures because of the attestations of historians to whom you ascribe laughable powers. Given the record presented of human history, it's more than reasonable to believe that the course of human history changed, and people became mortally devoted followers of him, because a Jew whom gentiles call Jesus Christ actually lived, actually preached, actually performed miracles, actually died, and actually rose from the dead. Given that the truth always outs, the story of Christ is more reasonable than your posit.