New Chronology: Historical Fantasy or a Fresh Perspective on History?
The history of humanity is a tapestry woven with mysteries and enigmas, often hidden amidst the pages of textbooks. Among the most intriguing and debated topics is the Middle Ages, that epoch standing between ancient times and the modern era. “New Chronology,” an emerging trend in historiography, challenges these long-established notions by offering a completely different perspective, urging us to rethink some of the pivotal events in world history.
One of the foremost and crucial questions posed by the proponents of “New Chronology” concerns the Medieval period and its elusive mysteries. What exactly happened to human civilization following the fall of the grand Roman Empire? According to advocates of this alternative theory, the arts and sciences purportedly vanished for an entire millennium, transforming the Middle Ages into a dark and ignorant era.
Consider examples such as the treasures of antiquity—magnificent statues, temples, and amphitheaters, along with an abundance of literary and philosophical works that have reached us. Yet, how sparse are the material and cultural relics of the Medieval period compared to ancient times! Proponents of “New Chronology” find this phenomenon suspicious, suggesting that historians intentionally sidestep this era, creating the impression that everyone wishes to forget it.
Moreover, the illustrious Frankish Empire, the reign of Charlemagne, the grandeur of the Habsburg dynasty—all these significant historical moments, according to “New Chronology,” are described very vaguely and fragmentarily. Could this be deliberate concealment or simply a lack of sources? Why are there so many ancient monuments but almost none from the medieval period? This question becomes a key argument for reconsidering the official history.
for free
Advocates of the “New Chronology” claim that during the 16th century, amid the Reformation, a sweeping revision of historical legacy took place. According to them, rulers of that era rewrote history to justify their right to power and to display the antiquity of their lineages. If this were true, many events that occurred before the 16th century would have been obscured and distorted, altering our perception of world history.
One of the most striking examples is the Frankish Empire and Charlemagne. Proponents of the “New Chronology” are convinced that this powerful state was deliberately erased from historical records. They believe such actions were taken so that the new rulers of Europe and the Romanov dynasty in Russia could rewrite their genealogies, cementing their claims to ancient roots and legitimate Leadership.
Thus, the “New Chronology” theory not only offers a fresh perspective on historical events but also undermines the conventional understanding of all human civilization. It leads us to ponder whether entire eras could have been erased or distorted for the sake of power. Or is it all just historical fantasy? The questions remain open, sparking unending interest and debate among historians and the general public.
The medieval period holds many mysteries and enigmas that continue to intrigue historians and researchers. Despite the vast amount of work on the subject, the founders of the “New Chronology” challenge established scientific norms. They argue that our history has been artificially extended by a thousand years due to erroneous and subjective dating methods employed by renowned scholars of the past, such as Joseph Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius. According to their studies, a significant portion of historical facts were either exaggerated or deliberately distorted and concealed.
The “New Chronology” theory asserts that numerous so-called “phantom” events and characters create the illusion of a lengthy medieval period. According to this concept, the genuinely significant era of human development did not begin until the 17th century. Everything before that time is proposed to be a deliberate fabrication or a distorted retelling of events that actually occurred in the previous 200 years. For example, significant occurrences like the fall of the Western Roman Empire or the Crusades are, according to “New Chronology,” believed to have happened much later than traditionally assumed.
One of the central arguments of “New Chronology” is the analysis of medieval dating systems. The letter “X,” which once symbolized Christ’s name, was allegedly misinterpreted as the number 10, leading to a significant chronological shift of 1,000 years. This issue arose from differences in how dates were recorded. Initially, manuscripts fully recorded dates with references to Christ, but later they started using abbreviations with the letter “X.” For instance, the date I.400, according to the “New Chronology” theory, means “400 years after Jesus” rather than the year 1400 as traditionally thought.
However, the ideas of “New Chronology” have met substantial resistance within the academic community. Many respected historians have built their research and written dissertations based on traditional Scaligerian chronology. These experts fiercely defend their perspectives, challenging revisionist theories and engaging in heated debates with proponents of “New Chronology.” Considering this lively academic debate, one can only admire the boldness and persistence of “New Chronology” researchers, who have dared to challenge established views and offered a fresh perspective for studying our history.
