Oh, dear. I'd really like to play here, but I have some more conspiracies for you. The calendar as we know it is a fiction.

The "Intermediate periods" in Egypt aren't nearly so long. The "Bronze Age Collapse" didn't happen. The dark ages didn't happen. It's phantom time and historians try to fill it with events that properly belong somewhere else.

The Greeks didn't forget how to write for 300 years and then rediscover it with a new alphabet. The Anglo Saxons in England didn't forget how to use money for 300 years and then rediscover coinage in the Viking Age. The Saxons are the Vikings but there are about 300 years of extra time in there.

There are some interesting Viking connections though. They took over North Africa and Spain in the late Roman Empire.

Ramesses II was from a military family. His mummy appears to have red hair. They came from Lower Egypt (next to the Mediterranean) rather than Upper Egypt like the native Egyptian dynasties. The people of Lower Egypt were mixed canaanite and other. The military families might have been an early people like the Vikings - originally hired as mercenaries, just like the Byzantines hired the Vikings centuries later.

>>1842697

Yes, Columbus certainly would have known the route to the New World from peoples who came before. He knew the route to follow by the Trade Winds. He may not have known precisely where it would take him, but he knew the route from people who came before.

When the English went to the New World they seem to have miraculously known already about the northern route the Vikings had used before. Reason: the sailors always knew. They followed the fish and the birds for thousands of years.

>>1842742

>>1842697

And one more thing: NASA messed with the eclipse data on their website that we should be able to use to prove or disprove ancient documents.

I'm not sure there was enough data to do much with B.C. eclipses, but the NASA docs from 1 A.D. to 1000 A.D. have been "corrected" to conform to the dates and eclipses listed in ancient texts. Meaning, the NASA eclipse historical data is not a scientific cross-check on ancient texts. It assumes that the ancient texts have the dates correct, and corrects the NASA data to match.

That means a scholar can't use the NASA eclipse data as an independent check against ancient writings. Now why would NASA do that?

>>1842923

I actually have a somewhat reliable proof of the middle ages timeline being messed up.

We should be in "the dawning of the age of Aquarius", right?

But we still have several hundred years left in the age of Pisces. If you compare Ptolemy's star demarcations of the astronomical signs, with Geminos's conviction that we were in the beginning of Pisces in his time (around 50 B.C.) then we have at least another 300 years of Pisces left before we get to Aquarius.

Modern star charts just seem to ignore Ptolemy's very specific sign boundaries and set new ones that are about 5 degrees different, thus making it so we don't notice the missing 300 years or so.

>>1842983

The Church told a convenient story about why the Gregorian Calendar didn't have to move as much as it should have if the Julian Calendar had actually been in place since Julius Caesar. They said they were resetting from the dates accepted during the Council of Nicea in 325. But really, they were trying to account for phantom time.

And it makes sense. The stories of the Anglo Saxon invasions sound just like the Viking invasions. The Anglo Saxons and the Vikings spoke essentially the same language - different regional spellings, but the same language.

>>1842978

Not really. The geneologies get secretive and messed up when you get too far back. I think there are family lines maybe among the Italian families that you could do it with, if you kept a proper timeline. I think it may be part of what they're hiding - or fabricating so we can't properly trace them as outsiders.

>>1842978

And the name game is really hard to play. A Latin name and spelling vs. the same name in Germanic looks really different. Makes it easy to get doubles of the same people in "different" times.

>>1843051

Well, my best estimate at present, is that there are an extra 350 years or so in the 1 - 1000 AD period. I also think there may be up to 70 years extra in the time between Alexander the Great (~330 BC) and Augustus (~1 AD). I think Augustus messed with the calendar there and that's why it's so hard to see what was happening in the years between Alexander and Augustus.

Then there are about 300 years in the Third Intermediate Period, "Bronze Age Collapse". It didn't really collapse, but the dynasties changed and the power structure changed to Babylon/Persia instead of Egypt. Egyptian dynasties were Persian in that time.

>>1843051

So it's all kind of a mess. Interestingly, when you remove the Third Intermediate Period, the biblical chronology makes more sense. Solomon is somewhat corresponding to probably Merenptah, David is in the Ramesses II period. Shishak is Ramesses III (nickname Sesi, or Sheshi). Now, to me, David especially looks too much like Ramesses II. I think that not only were these characters contemporary, but their stories have become intertwined. Ramesses means "beloved" just like David means "beloved". Both had large harems, both lived and rulled for an extraordinarily long time, both started as nobodies with military backgrounds (for Ramesses that was more his father, but still…) So there appears to be a significant amount of mythologizing in there, but it all still makes me believe the timeframes line up.

>>1843120

Agreed. All we really know about them is that they're merchants living on the coast and they seem to rule the seas. Phoenician was someone else's name for them.

>>1843204

Well, there was certainly a regime change and there are destruction layers. But there are too many sites where there's a destruction layer, then 300 years of no occupation, then a new city on the same site. The only reason for the 300 years of abandonment is because the lower level is clearly bronze age and the upper level is clearly iron age dated to some Egyptian king who we assume we know when he lived. But if he lived at a different time, then the city burned down and was immediately rebuilt.

>>1843204

Also, whenever historians try to explain something that looks like an advanced people suddenly forgetting some significant aspect of civilization like writing or money and then learning it again in a new alphabet or language 300 years later, reemerging right where they left off, I get suspicious. People don't actually forget those things.

>>1843204

I think the Bronze Age Collapse was regime change and language change. Egypt had a significant fall. They were taken over by outsiders and that's the hinge we build all of our history on. For the ancient stuff, the book "Centuries of Darkness" by Peter James and some others is a good resource.

The astronomical proof of the middle ages is mine. There are a couple of people who think we're dealing with phantom time there, but I don't fully agree with them.

>>1843331

Yeah, they had great memories, but every story teller adds their own part. No way it went unchanged. Unfortunately, book copyists did the same damned thing.

>>1843347

I think the Canaanites were playing a game. All of the kingdoms in canaan went back and forth between Babylon/Persia, Hitites and Egypt. They were overrun all the time. So if there's a power vacuum in Egypt, they ally with whoever is next to pursue their interests.

>>1843390

No kidding. And they didn't have photographic evidence to prove anything.

It could all be very Orwellian, actually. To please a new regime, you change the history to suit it. Shakespeare did it with all of his histories. It's probably always been propaganda. I love history and I want truth so it really hurts me to say that.

>>1843426

Oh, definitely, using a new scary god and religion to take over is a powerful trick. I'm reading a book now, "James, the brother of Jesus" about how the Paulines and the Romans took over the religion from it's "rightful" heir, James.

>>1843457

It was essentially an infiltration of the Roman Empire by a religious cult.

>>1843347

One more thing, when you adjust timelines to remove the dark ages, the Hyksos kings - some of them - are Joseph and his family.

Moses (and Joshua, actually) is an actual Egyptian adopted into the Hebrew mythology. His name is Egyptian and it fits with the Egyptian rulers of that time, but he seems to be some kind of conflation of Ahmose and Thutmose I and Thutmose III.

And fascinatingly, if you read the Exodus account of the parting of the Red Sea, it looks like a tidal wave with some kind of volcanic eruption causing fire in the sky. It fits nicely with the volcanic eruption of Thera (Santorini).

>>1843869

And Ramesses II and his familly were likely of Canaanite stock (whatever that is), so they'd already taken over again in the 19th dynasty.

>>1847470

Interesting take on monotheism. I hadn't really thought of it that way.

Certainly it does correspond with the rise of kingship and absolute authority. And it usurps the authority and delegitimizes the old household gods that every family kept as idols and individual protectors.

The bible still retains some memory of that when Rachel steals them from her father when she leaves to marry Jacob.

And I'll go on record that I also think Akhenaten was a bad guy. And as in the present with Q team, he and his family were taken out by the military.

>>1848458

TimeAnon here. You have to keep in mind that the 300 year gap isn't exactly the same in every place. Islam falls into this period too and it explains the difficulty of figuring out its early history.

>>1848458

Also, without the time gap, Rome doesn't really "fall" so much as change. The old Rome is taken over by the papacy and church leadership with local kings subject to a religious rule. They institute the Holy Roman Emperor with Charlemagne (or the three guys or so that he is an amalgam of) almost immediately. Charlemagne is a late Roman figure. The Saxons/Vikings in England are late Roman figures brought in as mercenaries initially to defend the Romans.

>>1848619

It's a late Roman event. Look at Arab history - in particular the 200 and 300s AD. The "Roman Emperors" are easterners. There are petty kingdoms where people also claim to be emperors. The library at Alexandria was destroyed by somebody or other at two or three different periods - because the stories from different groups conflict in where they were placed in time.

Queen Zenobia is an interesting character. Only in a few of our sources, but there are a couple of Zaynabs - the same Arab name, in the Arab histories. There were and are mosques and holy sites for "Zaynab". What if Islam came about around the same time as Christianity in a late Roman world. Zenobia's wars with Rome and the other Roman wars in Syria during that time look like the wars that were happening in the Arab histories at the beginning of Islam.

>>1848689

Exactly. Makes me crazy to go to a museum and see how everyone forgot how to use coinage and how to write. No. They continued to use coin, but there's a time gap so it looks like there are no coins from a certain period. And they certainly wrote. But they stopped writing Latin like good Romans and started writing in AngloSaxon germanic.

>>1848619

Different names and sources from different peoples make it hard to put history together. There are several duplicates in our histories. The Byzantine Emperor Phocas is probably the same guy as the Byzantine emperor Nikephorus II Phocas. A person's Greek name and their Latin name and their native name could all look different. If you don't have your chronology right to start with, they look like different people.

Example from the Venerable Bede. Take a look at his history and notice what he did. His history is a combination of local histories and Orosius. Orosius stops writing in the 400s AD and is based on Jerome - the first conspirator. Bede uses that history and tells a Roman story of Britain, then tacks his local history onto the end of it. Even though we know from other Roman sources like Ammianus Marcellinus that there were Saxons and mercenaries and kings in Britain in the early Romano British history. Bede has no locally sourced history until he finishes with Orosius. If, instead of tacking his history on to the end, he were to make it more intertwined, as it almost certainly should have been, you change the timeline.

>>1848823

Rome's east/west split in that time is something of a fiction. There were always rulers in the East. This was a time of multiple emperors and caesars.

You're funny with your request for a simple graphic. I've been working on this for a long time and I haven't gotten to simple yet. I have a couple of interesting points to start folding time together.

There is a siege of Amida in Procopius and a Siege of Amida in Ammianus Marcellinus. I believe they are the same event. Ammianus is writing supposedly about events in 370 AD or so. Procopius is describing and event that supposedly happened nearly 200 years later. Ammianus has more detail in his story, but his details match the brief story in Procopius.

If that is a description of the same event, then you've found almost 200 of your missing years - for those people and that event. It goes like that all over. You can't just plop 300 years in or out of a timeline. It comes in chunks.

>>1848912

It's true that scribes and writers try to make a good story, but it's also true that once a particular view of history is in place, the authority figures have a vested interest in not letting it change.

There are 8 pages missing from a manuscript of Zosimus in the Vatican library. My read on it suggests those pages were where the author clarified his place in time as he knew it, describing emperors and jubilees. They were not lost pages. They were deliberately and neatly cut from the manuscript.

>>1848912

Sorry, btw. I didn't mean to hijack your thread with timeline stuff. I am genuinely interested in how all of this works with the cabal and bloodlines, Vikings, Phoenicians, etc. I just can't separate it from the rest of my research that suggests the timeline is wrong.

Maybe I'll gather some of my data over the next week or so and make a new thread with some proofs and evidence.

>>1850450

Hmmm. That's a touchy one. We don't have anything from Tyre or Sidon - and can't dig there because of cities presently in place. And there's almost nothing from Carthage. But the Jews left us a great deal of writing. And the Jews of Spain have to be considered Phoenician/Carthaginian in origin. Greek mythology and culture - and alphabet - was heavily influenced by "Phoenician" culture. Athena is a version of Anat/Tanit. The Zeus/Dionysius cult is certainly Eastern/Canaanite. Greeks and Semites lived side by side throughout the Mediterranean for centuries. But the specifics of the legacy are hard to tease out.

>>1862677

Newton was an interesting character. And so was the Queen in the dedication, George II's wife Caroline of Ansbach. By all accounts she was the actual ruler during her life.

I assume Newton was cabal. At the very least he was interested in it and very aware of it. Neal Stephenson, who's books now look to me like someone who knows too much, writes about them in his Baroque Series. Along with William and Mary.

Back to Newton, his intertwining of "mythological" with more "historical" people may be code, or allegory, or just ignorant. I can't tell. But he does use the older convention from Manetho and others that places David and Solomon firmly in the Bronze age and equates the Exodus with the expulsion of the Hyksos.

I first looked at this book several years ago and I've never quite known what to make of it. Today, given what I suspect about Newton and Caroline, I think it must be some sort of coded or allegorical history for those who ascribe particular occult meaning to those characters and stories.

>>1864440

Yeah, I agree. I spend a fair amount of time poring through old editions because of it.

I have a theory that Theodor Mommsen was part of the effort to nail down the history (((they))) wanted to teach. He did the standard translations of most of the ancient texts that existed then, "corrected" spelling and syntax errors, and "standardized" dates.

Most translations today into English and other languages start from Mommsen's editions rather than going back to extant manuscripts. The whole 19th century German school of historians looks like cabal setting history their way.

So from that perspective, my only hope is anything written before Mommsen and anyone who does translation and text analysis from extant manuscripts with proper notations of "corrections."

>>1865446

All of the Greek myths from Crete have a strong Phoenician and Cypriot influence.

I wonder if many coastal Greeks were originally Semitic and the "Dorian invasion" was actually the Greek-speaking Mycenaeans.

Cyrus Gordon thought the Cretans were Semites and that the Linear A tables were writting in a Semitic language.