2. The era of the XI-XII centuries The Nativity of Christ in 1152 and his crucifixion in Tsar-Grad in 1185 Christian religion The history of the Gospel Magi reflects the worship of Russia-Horde to Andronicus-Christ in the XII century. "Seven Wonders of the World", Ch. 2.

Before the creation of traditional chronology, there were about two hundred different versions of dates, with which the story was adjusted to fit the biblical concept. Moreover, the range of these options was impressive - more than 3500 years, that is, the period from the "Creation of the world" to "Nativity of Christ" fit into the interval between 3483 and 6984 BC.

And so, in order to bring all these disparate options to a single plausible form, the Jesuit monk Petavius ​​and the chronologist Scaliger were involved in the case.

The chronology of ancient and medieval history, which at the moment is considered the only true one and is studied in schools and universities, was created in Xvi- Xviicenturies ad. Its authors are the Western European chronologist JOSEPH SCALIGER and the Catholic Jesuit monk DIONYSUS PETAVIUS.

They brought the chronological spread of dates, so to speak, to a common denominator. However, their dating methods, like those of their predecessors, were imperfect, erroneous, and subjective. And, sometimes, these "mistakes" were of a deliberate (ordered) nature. As a result, the story was lengthened by thousand years, and this extra millennium was filled with phantom events and characters that had never really existed before.

Joseph Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius

Subsequently, some delusions gave rise to others and, growing like a snowball, dragged the chronology of events in world history into the abyss of virtual piles that had nothing to do with reality.

This pseudoscientific chronological doctrine of SCALIGER-PETAVIUS, at one time, was seriously criticized by prominent figures of world science. Among them are the famous English mathematician and physicist Isaac Newton, the prominent French scientist Jean Harduin, the English historian Edwin Johnson, German educators - philologist Robert Baldauf and lawyer Wilhelm Kammaer, Russian scientists - Peter Nikiforovich Krekshin (personal secretary of Peter I) and Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, American historian (of Belarusian origin) Emmanuil Velikovsky.

Isaac Newton,Petr Nikiforovich Krekshin, Nikolay Alexandrovich Morozov, Emmanuil Velikovsky

Further, already in our days, the baton of rejection of the Scaligerian chronology was picked up by their followers. Among them - Academician of the "Russian Academy of Sciences", Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko(the author of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" in co-authorship with the candidate of mathematical sciences Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky), Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Lenin Prize Laureate, Professor Mikhail Mikhailovich Postnikov and a scientist from Germany - historian and writer Yevgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich.

Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko, Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Evgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich

But, in spite of the selfless research work of these scientists, the world historical community still uses in its scientific arsenal, as a standard, the foundations of the vicious "Scaligerian" chronology. Until now, there is no complete, fundamental and objective research on the "Chronology the ancient world"Meeting the modern requirements of historical science.

How dates were recorded in the Middle Ages

In the XV, XVI and XII centuries, after the introduction into circulation of the "JULIAN", and then, and the "GRIGORIAN" calendar, leading the chronology "FROM THE BIRTH OF CHRIST", the dates were written in Roman and Arabic numerals, but not like today, but TOGETHER WITH LETTERS.

But they have already managed to “forget” about it.

In medieval Italy, Byzantium and Greece, dates were written in Roman numerals.

« ROMAN NUMERALS, the numbers of the ancient Romans, -said in the encyclopedia, - The Roman numeral system is based on the use of special characters for decimal places:

C = 100 (centum)

M = 1000 (mille)

and their halves:

L = 50 (quinquaginta)

D = 500 (quingenti)

Natural numbers are written by repeating these numbers. Moreover, if the larger number comes before the smaller one, then they add up

IX = 9

(the principle of addition), if the smaller one is in front of the larger one, then the smaller one is subtracted from the larger one (the principle of subtraction). The last rule applies only to avoid repeating the same number four times. "

I = 1

V = 5

X = 10

Why, exactly, and only such signs were used for small numbers? Probably, at first, people operated on small values. Only later did large numbers come into use. For example, more than fifty, hundreds, and so on. Then new, additional signs were required, like:

L= 50

C = 100

D = 500

M = 1000

Therefore, it is logical to believe that the signs for small numbers were the original, earliest, MOST ANCIENT. In addition, initially, in writing Roman numerals, the so-called system of "addition and subtraction" of signs was not used. She appeared much later. For example, the numbers 4 and 9, in those days, were written like this:

9 = VIIII

This is clearly seen in the medieval Western European engraving by the German artist Georg Penz "TIME TRIUMPH" and on the old book miniature with a sundial.

Dates in the Middle Ages according to the "JULIAN" and "GRIGORIAN" calendars, leading chronology from the "CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY", were written in letters and numbers.

X= "Christ"

Greek letter « X and", Standing in front of a date written in Roman numerals, once meant a name "Christ", but then it was changed into a number 10, denoting ten centuries, that is, a millennium.

Thus, there was a chronological shift of medieval dates by 1000 years, when juxtaposed by later historians of two different ways of recording.

How were dates recorded in those days?

The first of these methods was, of course, to record the date in full.

She looked like this:

Icentury from the birth of Christ

IIcentury from the birth of Christ

IIIcentury from the birth of Christ

"1st century from the birth of Christ", "2nd century from the birth of Christ", "3rd century from the birth of Christ", etc.

The second way was the abbreviated notation.

Dates were written like this:

X. I= from Christ I-th century

X. II= from Christ II-th century

X. III= from Christ III-th century

etc. where « X» - not roman numeral 10 , and the first letter in the word "Christ" written in Greek.

Mosaic image of Jesus Christ on the dome of "Hagia Sophia" in Istanbul

Letter « X» - one of the most common medieval monograms, still found in ancient icons, mosaics, frescoes and book miniatures. She symbolizes the name Of Christ... Therefore, they put it in front of the date written in Roman numerals in the calendar leading the chronology "from the CHRIST'S CHRISTMAS", and separated it with a dot from the numbers.

It is from these abbreviations that the designations of centuries adopted today arose. True, the letter « X» is already read by us not as a letter, but as a Roman numeral 10.

When they wrote the date in Arabic numerals, they put the letter in front of them « I» - the first letter of the name "Jesus”Written in Greek and, too, was separated by a dot. But later, this letter was announced "Unit", supposedly denoting "One thousand".

I.400 = from Jesus 400th year

Consequently, the record of the date "I" point 400, for example, originally meant: "From Jesus the 400th year."

This way of writing is consistent with the previous one, since the year I. 400 is the 400th

From Jesus 400th year= 400th year from the beginningX. Iin n. e. =X. Iv.

year "From the Nativity of Jesus" or "400th year from the beginningX. Icentury AD e. "

Here is a medieval English engraving, allegedly dated 1463. But if you look closely, you can see that the first number one (ie, one thousand) is not a number at all, but the Latin letter "I". Exactly the same as the letter on the left in the word "DNI". Incidentally, the Latin inscription "Anno domini" means "from the Nativity of Christ" - abbreviated as ADI (from Jesus) and ADX (from Christ). Consequently, the date written on this engraving is not 1463, as modern chronologists and art historians claim, but 463 "From Jesus", i.e. "From the Nativity of Christ."

This old engraving by the German artist Johans Baldung Green bears his author's stamp with the date (allegedly 1515). But with a strong increase in this mark, you can clearly see the Latin letter at the beginning of the date « I"(From Jesus) exactly the same as in the monogram of the author "IGB" (Johannes Baldung Green), and the number "one" written differently here.

This means that the date on this engraving is not 1515, as modern historians claim, but 515 from the "Nativity of Christ".

On the title page of the book by Adam Olearius "Description of the journey in

Muscovy ”depicts an engraving with a date (allegedly 1566). At first glance, the Latin letter "I" at the beginning of the date can be taken as a unit, but if we look closely, we will clearly see that this is not a number at all, but a capital letter "I", exactly the same as in this fragment from

old handwritten German text.

Therefore, the real date of the engraving on the title page of the medieval book of Adam Olearius is not 1566, but 566 from the "Nativity of Christ".

The same capital Latin letter "I" appears at the beginning of the date on an old engraving depicting the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This engraving was made by a medieval Western European artist, as we already understand now, not in 1664, but in 664 - from the "Nativity of Christ".

And in this portrait of the legendary Marina Mnishek (wife of False Dmitry I), the capital letter "I" at high magnification does not at all look like number one, no matter how we try to imagine it. And although historians attribute this portrait to 1609, common sense tells us that the true date of the engraving was 609 from the "Nativity of Christ".

On the engraving of the medieval coat of arms of the German city of Nuremberg it is written in large: "Anno (ie, date) from Jesus 658". The capital letter "I" in front of the date digits is depicted so clearly that it is impossible to confuse it with any "unit".

This engraving was made, no doubt, in 658 from the "Nativity of Christ"... By the way, the two-headed eagle, located in the center of the coat of arms, tells us that Nuremberg in those distant times was part of the Russian Empire.

Exactly the same capital letters " I"Can also be seen in dates on ancient frescoes in the medieval" Chilienne Castle "located in the picturesque Swiss Riviera on the shores of Lake Geneva near the city of Montreux.

Dates, " by Jesus 699 and 636", Historians and art historians, today, read how 1699 and 1636 year, explaining this discrepancy, by the ignorance of illiterate medieval artists who made mistakes in writing numbers.

In other old frescoes, Shilienskongo Castle, dated already in the eighteenth century, that is, after the Scaligerian reform, the dates are written, from the point of view of modern historians, "correctly". Letter " I", Meaning earlier," from the birth of Jesus", Replaced by the number" 1 ", Ie, - thousand.

In this old portrait of Pope PIUS II, we clearly see not one, but immediately, three dates. Date of birth, date of accession to the papal throne and date of death of PIUS II. And before each date there is a capital Latin letter « I» (from Jesus).

The artist in this portrait is clearly overdoing it. He put the letter "I" not only in front of the numbers of the year, but also in front of the numbers that mean the days of the month. So, probably, he showed his servile admiration for the Vatican "viceroy of God on earth."

And here, completely unique from the point of view of medieval dating, engraving of the Russian Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya (wife of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich). Historians naturally date it back to 1662. However, it has a completely different date. "From Jesus" 662. The Latin letter "I" here is capitalized with a dot and does not in any way look like a unit. Below, we see another date - the date of birth of the Queen: "From Jesus" 625, i.e. 625 "from the birth of Christ".

We see the same letter "I" with a dot before the date in the portrait of Erasmus by the German artist Albrecht Durer of Rotterdam. In all art history reference books, this drawing is dated 1520. However, it is quite obvious that this date is being interpreted erroneously and corresponds to 520th year "from the birth of Christ".

Another engraving by Albrecht Durer: "Jesus Christ in the Underworld" is dated in the same way - 510 year "from the birth of Christ".

This old plan of the German city of Cologne has the date that modern historians read as 1633. However, here, too, the Latin letter "I" with a dot is completely different from a unit. The correct dating of this engraving means - 633 from the "Nativity of Christ".

By the way, here, too, we see an image of a two-headed eagle, which once again testifies that Germany was once part of the Russian Empire.

In these engravings by the German artist Augustin Hirschvogel, the date is included in the author's monogram. Here, too, the Latin letter "I" stands in front of the year numbers. And, of course, it is completely different from one.

The medieval German artist Georg Penz dated his engravings in the same way. 548 "from the birth of Christ" written on this, his, author's monogram.

And on this medieval German coat of arms of Western Saxony, the dates are written without the letter "I" at all. The artist did not have enough space for the letter on the narrow vignettes, he simply neglected to write it, leaving only the most important information for the viewer - the 519th and 527th years. And the fact that these dates "From the Nativity of Christ"- in those days, it was known to everyone.

On this Russian naval map, published during the reign of the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, that is, in the middle of the 18th century, it is quite clearly written: KRONSTADT. Map Marine Accurate. Written and measured by order of Her Imperial Majesty in 740th year of the fleet by captain Nogayev ... composed in 750th year ". Dates 740 and 750 are also recorded without the letter "I". But the 750th year is 8th century, not 18th.

Examples with dates can be given indefinitely, but it seems to me that this is no longer necessary. The evidence that has come down to our days convinces us that the Scaligerian chronologists, using simple manipulations, lengthened our history by 1000 years by making the public around the world believe this blatant lie.

Modern historians tend to shy away from an articulate explanation of this chronological shift. At best, they simply mark the fact itself, explaining it by considerations of "convenience."

They say this: "VXv‑ Xvicenturies when dating, often, thousands or even hundreds were omitted ... "

As we now understand, medieval chroniclers honestly wrote:

150th year"From the Nativity of Christ"

200th year"From the Nativity of Christ"

150th year "from the birth of Christ" or 200th year "from the birth of Christ", meaning - in modern chronology - 1150th or 1200th

1150th or 1200s n. e.

years n. e. And only then, the Scaligerian chronologists will declare that it is imperative to add another thousand years to these "small dates".

So they artificially made medieval history old.

In ancient documents (especially the XIV-XVII centuries), when writing dates in letters and numbers, the first letters denoting, as it is believed today, "Big numbers", separated by dots from subsequent "Small numbers" within a dozen or hundreds.

Here is an example of a similar recording of a date (allegedly 1524) on an engraving by Albrecht Durer. We see that the first letter is depicted as a frank Latin letter "I" with a dot. In addition, it is separated by dots on both sides so that it is not accidentally confused with the numbers. Therefore, Dürer's engraving is dated not 1524, but 524 from the "Nativity of Christ".

Exactly the same date is recorded on an engraving portrait of the Italian composer Carlo Brosci, dated 1795. The Latin capital letter "I" with a dot is also separated by dots from the numbers. Therefore, this date should be read as 795 "from the birth of Christ".

And on the old engraving of the German artist Albrecht Altdorfer "The Temptation of Hermits" we see a similar date entry. It is believed to have been made in 1706.

By the way, the number 5 here is very similar to the number 7. Maybe the date is not written here. 509 "from the birth of Christ", a 709 ? How accurately are the engravings attributed to Albrecht Altdorfer, who allegedly lived in the 16th century, dated today? Maybe he lived 200 years later?

And this engraving shows a medieval publishing mark "Louis Elsevier". The date (supposedly 1597) is written with dots and using left and right crescents to write the Latin letters "I" in front of Roman numerals. This example is interesting because right there, on the left tape, there is also a record of the same date in Arabic numerals. She is depicted as a letter « I» separated by a dot from the numbers "597" and reads nothing else but 597 "from the birth of Christ".

Using the right and left crescents separating the Latin letter "I" from the Roman numerals, the dates are recorded on the title pages of these books. The name of one of them: "Russia or Muscovy, called TARTARIA".

And on this old engraving of the "Ancient coat of arms of the city of Vilno", the date is depicted in Roman numerals, but without the letter "X". It is clearly written here: « ANNO. Vii.» Moreover, the date " Viicentury " highlighted by dots.

But no matter how the dates were recorded in the Middle Ages, never, in those days,

X=10

roman numeral " ten" didn't mean " tenth century " or " 1000 ". For this,

M=1000.

much later, the so-called "big" figure appeared "M"= t thousand.

This is how, for example, the dates written in Roman numerals looked like after the Scaligerian reform, when an extra thousand years were added to medieval dates. In the first couples, they were still written "according to the rules", that is, separating "large numbers" from "small" ones with dots.

Then they stopped doing it. Simply, the entire date was highlighted with dots.

And in this self-portrait of the medieval artist and cartographer Augustine Hirschvogel, the date was most likely inscribed in the engraving much later. The artist himself left on his works the author's monogram, which looked like this:

But, I repeat once again that in all medieval documents that have survived to this day, including fakes dated in Roman numerals, the figure "X" never meant a thousand.

X= 10

M= 1000

For this, a "large" Roman numeral was used. "M".

Over time, information that Latin letters « X» and « I» at the beginning of the indicated dates meant the first letters of the words " Christ" and " Jesus", has been lost. Numerical values ​​were attributed to these letters, and the dots separating them from the numbers were cunningly abolished in subsequent printed editions or, simply, erased. As a result, abbreviated dates, like:

H.SH = XIII century

I.300 = 1300 year

"From Christ III century" or "From Jesus the 300th year" began to be perceived as "Thirteenth century" or "One thousand three hundredth year".

A similar interpretation automatically added to the original date thousand years... Thus, the result was a falsified date, a millennium older than the real one.

The hypothesis of "negation of a thousand years" proposed by the authors of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovsky, agrees well with the well-known fact that medieval Italians did not designate centuries thousands, a hundred:

XIIIv. = DUCHENTO= 200th years

This is how the two hundredth years were designated, that is, "DUCHENTO"

XIVv.= TRECENTO= Three hundredth years

And so - the three hundredth, that is, "TRECHENTO"

Xvv.= QUATROCENTO= Four hundredth years

Four hundredth, that is, "QUATROCENTO".

Xvicentury =CHINKQUENTO= Five hundredth years

And the five hundredth, that is, "CHINKVECHENTO". But such designations of centuries

XIIIv. = DUCHENTO= 200th years

XIVv.= TRECENTO= Three hundredth years

Xvv.= QUATROCENTO= Four hundredth years

Xviv.= CHINKQUENTO= Five hundredth years

directly indicate the origin exactly from XIcentury new era since the addendum adopted today is denied "thousands years".

It turns out that the medieval Italians, it turns out, did not know any "thousand years" for the simple reason that this "extra millennium" was not even in those days.

Exploring the old church book "PALEIA", which was used in Russia up to the 17th century instead of the "Bible" and "New Testament", which indicated the exact dates " Christmas», « Baptisms" and " Crucifixion Jesus Christ ", recorded crosswise on two calendars:" From the Creation of the World "and an older, indicative one, Fomenko and Nosovsky came to the conclusion that these dates do not coincide with each other.

With the help of modern mathematical computer programs, they managed to calculate the true values ​​of these dates, recorded in the ancient Russian "Paley":

Nativity of Christ - December 1152.

Baptism - January 1182

Crucifixion- March 1185.

Old church book "Paleya"

"Circumcision" Albrecht Durer

"Baptism". Mosaic in Ravenna, 1500

"Crucifixion". Luca Signorelli, 1500

These dates are confirmed by other ancient documents, astronomical zodiacs and legendary biblical events that have come down to us. Recall, for example, the results of the radiocarbon analysis of the "Shroud of Turin" and the outburst of the "Star of Bethlehem" (known in astronomy, as the "Crab Nebula"), which informed the Magi about the birth of Jesus Christ. Both events, it turns out, belong to the 12th century AD!

Shroud of Turin

The Crab Nebula (Star of Bethlehem)

Historians are racking their brains over the still unsolvable question - why so few medieval monuments of material culture and so many antiquities have survived to this day? It would be more logical, it would be the other way around.

"Hunting Scene". A fresco from an Egyptian pyramid

"Three Graces". Fresco from Pompeii

They explain this by the fact that after a centuries-old period of rapid development, ancient civilizations suddenly degraded and fell into decay, having forgotten all the scientific and cultural achievements of antiquity. And only in the 15-16th centuries, in the era of "Renaissance", people suddenly remembered all the discoveries and achievements of their civilized "antique" ancestors and, from that moment, began to develop dynamically and purposefully.

Not very convincing!

However, if we take the true date of birth of Jesus Christ as a starting point, everything immediately falls into place. There was, it turns out, in history

"Beggars"ADrian de Venne, 1630-1650

"Hunchback". Engraving, 16th century.

humanity of millennial backwardness and ignorance, there was no break in historical epochs, there were no sudden ups and downs that were not justified by anything. Our civilization developed evenly and consistently.

History - Science or Fiction?

Based on the foregoing, we can make a logical conclusion that the ancient world history, laid down in the Procrustean bed of a non-existent "mythical" millennium, is just an idle fiction, a figment of the imagination, formalized into a complete collection of works of fiction in the genre of historical legend.

Of course, it is quite difficult for a common man to believe in this today, especially in adulthood. The load of knowledge gained throughout life does not give him the opportunity to break out of the shackles of habitual, externally imposed, stereotypical beliefs.

Historians, whose doctoral dissertations and other fundamental scientific works were based on virtual Scaligerian history, categorically reject the idea of ​​a "NEW CHRONOLOGY" today, calling it "pseudoscience".

And instead of defending their point of view in the course of a polemical scientific discussion, as is customary in the civilized world, they, defending the honor of their "official uniform", are waging a fierce struggle with supporters of the "NEW CHRONOLOGY" her with just one common argument:

"This cannot be, because this can never be!"

And in this "struggle" for them, as a rule, all means are good, up to a petition to the higher authorities on the introduction of an article on criminal punishment into the "Criminal Code", up to imprisonment for the alleged "falsification of history."

But the truth will triumph in the end. Time will put everything in its place, although this path will be thorny and long.

This has already happened. And more than once. Recall, for example, genetics and cybernetics declared "pseudoscience" or the fate of the medieval Italian scientist Giordano Bruno, who was burned at the stake for his revolutionary, for that time, scientific and humanitarian ideas.

Giordano Bruno - Italian Dominican monk, philosopher, astronomer and poet

"BUT EVERYTHING, SHE TURNS!" - he said when they led him to the fire ...

Now, every schoolchild already knows that the Earth "revolves" around the Sun, and not the Sun around the Earth.

Based on materials director's script by Yuri Elkhov for the film "Non-existent Millennium"

Subscribe to us

Before the creation of traditional chronology, there were about two hundred different versions of dates, with which the story was adjusted to fit the biblical concept. Moreover, the range of these options was impressive - more than 3500 years, that is, the period from the "Creation of the world" to "Nativity of Christ" fit into the interval between 3483 and 6984 BC.

And so, in order to bring all these disparate options to a single plausible form, the Jesuit monk Petavius ​​and the chronologist Scaliger were involved in the case.

The chronology of ancient and medieval history, which at the moment is considered the only true one and is studied in schools and universities, was created in the 16th - 17th centuries AD. Its authors are the Western European chronologist JOSEPH SCALIGER and the Catholic Jesuit monk DIONYSUS PETAVIUS.

They brought the chronological spread of dates, so to speak, to a common denominator. However, their dating methods, like those of their predecessors, were imperfect, erroneous, and subjective. And, sometimes, these "mistakes" were of a deliberate (ordered) nature. As a result, the story lengthened by a thousand years, and this extra millennium was filled with phantom events and characters that had never really existed before.

Joseph Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius

Subsequently, some delusions gave rise to others and, growing like a snowball, dragged the chronology of events in world history into the abyss of virtual piles that had nothing to do with reality.

This pseudoscientific chronological doctrine of SCALIGER-PETAVIUS, at one time, was seriously criticized by prominent figures of world science. Among them are the famous English mathematician and physicist Isaac Newton, the prominent French scientist Jean Harduin, the English historian Edwin Johnson, German educators - philologist Robert Baldauf and lawyer Wilhelm Kammaer, Russian scientists - Peter Nikiforovich Krekshin (personal secretary of Peter I) and Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, American historian (of Belarusian origin) Emmanuil Velikovsky.

Isaac Newton,Petr Nikiforovich Krekshin, Nikolay Alexandrovich Morozov, Emmanuil Velikovsky

Further, already in our days, the baton of rejection of the Scaligerian chronology was picked up by their followers. Among them - Academician of the "Russian Academy of Sciences", Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko(the author of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" in co-authorship with the candidate of mathematical sciences Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky), Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Lenin Prize Laureate, Professor Mikhail Mikhailovich Postnikov and a scientist from Germany - historian and writer Yevgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich.

Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko, Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Evgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich

But, in spite of the selfless research work of these scientists, the world historical community still uses in its scientific arsenal, as a standard, the foundations of the vicious "Scaligerian" chronology. Until now, there is no complete, fundamental and objective research on the "Chronology of the Ancient World" that meets the modern requirements of historical science.

How dates were recorded in the Middle Ages

In the XV, XVI and XII centuries, after the introduction into circulation of the "JULIAN", and then, and the "GRIGORIAN" calendar, leading the chronology "FROM THE BIRTH OF CHRIST", the dates were written in Roman and Arabic numerals, but not like today, but TOGETHER WITH LETTERS.

But they have already managed to “forget” about it.

In medieval Italy, Byzantium and Greece, dates were written in Roman numerals.

« ROMAN NUMERALS, the numbers of the ancient Romans, -said in the encyclopedia, - The system of Roman numerals is based on the use of special characters for decimal places:

C = 100 (centum)

M = 1000 (mille)

And their halves:

V = 5 (quinque)

L = 50 (quinquaginta)

D = 500 (quingenti)

Natural numbers are written by repeating these numbers. Moreover, if the larger number comes before the smaller one, then they add up

IX = 9

(the principle of addition), if the smaller one is in front of the larger one, then the smaller one is subtracted from the larger one (the principle of subtraction). The last rule applies only to avoid repeating the same number four times. "

I = 1

V = 5

X = 10

Why, exactly, and only such signs were used for small numbers? Probably, at first, people operated on small values. Only later did large numbers come into use. For example, more than fifty, hundreds, and so on. Then new, additional signs were required, like:

L = 50

C = 100

D = 500

M = 1000

Therefore, it is logical to believe that the signs for small numbers were the original, earliest, MOST ANCIENT. In addition, initially, in writing Roman numerals, the so-called system of "addition and subtraction" of signs was not used. She appeared much later. For example, the numbers 4 and 9, in those days, were written like this:

9 = VIIII

This is clearly seen in the medieval Western European engraving by the German artist Georg Penz "TIME TRIUMPH" and on the old book miniature with a sundial.

Dates in the Middle Ages according to the "JULIAN" and "GRIGORIAN" calendars, leading chronology from the "CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY", were written in letters and numbers.

X = "Christ"

The Greek letter "Xi", before the date written in Roman numerals, once meant the name "Christ", but then it was changed into the number 10, denoting ten centuries, that is, a millennium.

Thus, there was a chronological shift in medieval dates by 1000 years, when later historians compared two different ways of recording.

How were dates recorded in those days?

The first of these methods was, of course, to record the date in full.

She looked like this:

I century from the birth of Christ

II century from the birth of Christ

III century from the birth of Christ

"1st century from the birth of Christ", "2nd century from the birth of Christ", "3rd century from the birth of Christ", etc.

The second way was the abbreviated notation.

Dates were written like this:

X. I = from Christ 1st century

X. II = from Christ II century

X. III = from Christ III century

Etc. where "X" is not the Roman numeral 10, but the first letter in the Greek word for "Christ".

Mosaic image of Jesus Christ on the dome of "Hagia Sophia" in Istanbul

The letter "X" is one of the most common medieval monograms, still found in ancient icons, mosaics, frescoes and book miniatures. She symbolizes the name of Christ. Therefore, they put it in front of the date written in Roman numerals in the calendar leading the chronology "from the CHRIST'S CHRISTMAS", and separated it with a dot from the numbers.

It is from these abbreviations that the designations of centuries adopted today arose. True, the letter "X" is already read by us not as a letter, but as the Roman numeral 10.

When the date was written in Arabic numerals, the letter "I" was put in front of them - the first letter of the name "Jesus", written in Greek, and, too, was separated by a dot. But later, this letter was declared a "unit", supposedly, meaning "one thousand".

I .400 = from Jesus 400th year

Consequently, the record of the date "I" point 400, for example, originally meant: "From Jesus the 400th year."

This way of writing is consistent with the previous one, since the year I. 400 is the 400th

From Jesus 400th year= 400th year from the beginning X. I in n. e. = X. 1st century

Year "From the Nativity of Jesus" or "400th year from the beginning X. 1st century AD e. "

Here is a medieval English engraving, allegedly dated 1463. But if you look closely, you can see that the first number one (ie, one thousand) is not a number at all, but the Latin letter "I". Exactly the same as the letter on the left in the word "DNI". Incidentally, the Latin inscription "Anno domini" means "from the Nativity of Christ" - abbreviated as ADI (from Jesus) and ADX (from Christ). Consequently, the date written on this engraving is not 1463, as modern chronologists and art historians claim, but 463 "from Jesus", i.e. "From the Nativity of Christ."

This old engraving by the German artist Johans Baldung Green bears his author's stamp with the date (allegedly 1515). But with a strong increase in this stigma, you can clearly see at the beginning of the date the Latin letter "I" (from Jesus) exactly the same as in the author's monogram "IGB" (Johannes Baldung Green), and the number "1" is written differently here.

This means that the date on this engraving is not 1515, as modern historians claim, but 515 from the "Nativity of Christ".

The title page of the book by Adam Olearius "Description of the trip to Moscow" shows an engraving with a date (allegedly 1566). At first glance, the Latin letter "I" at the beginning of the date can be taken as a unit, but if we look closely, we will clearly see that this is not a number at all, but a capital letter "I", exactly the same as in this fragment from an old handwritten German text.

Therefore, the real date of the engraving on the title page of the medieval book of Adam Olearius is not 1656, but 656 year from the "Nativity of Christ".

The same capital Latin letter "I" appears at the beginning of the date on an old engraving depicting the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This engraving was made by a medieval Western European artist, as we already understand now, not in 1664, but in 664 - from the "Nativity of Christ".

And in this portrait of the legendary Marina Mnishek (wife of False Dmitry I), the capital letter "I" at high magnification does not at all look like number one, no matter how we try to imagine it. And although historians attribute this portrait to 1609, common sense tells us that the true date of the engraving was 609 from the "Nativity of Christ".

On the engraving of the medieval coat of arms of the German city of Nuremberg it is written in large: "Anno (ie, date) from Jesus 658". The capital letter "I" in front of the date digits is depicted so clearly that it is impossible to confuse it with any "unit".

This engraving was made, no doubt, in 658 from the "Nativity of Christ"... By the way, the two-headed eagle, located in the center of the coat of arms, tells us that Nuremberg in those distant times was part of the Russian Empire.

Exactly the same, the same capital letters "I" can be seen in the dates on the old frescoes in the medieval "Chilienne Castle", located in the picturesque Swiss Riviera on the shores of Lake Geneva near the city of Montreux.

The dates "from Jesus 699 and 636", historians and art historians, today, read as 1699 and 1636, explaining this discrepancy, the ignorance of illiterate medieval artists who made mistakes in writing numbers.

In other ancient frescoes, Shilienskongo Castle, dated already in the eighteenth century, that is, after the Scaligerian reform, the dates are written, from the point of view of modern historians, "correctly". The letter "I", which meant earlier, " from the birth of Jesus", Is replaced by the number" 1 ", that is, - a thousand.

In this old portrait of Pope PIUS II, we clearly see not one, but immediately, three dates. Date of birth, date of accession to the papal throne and date of death of PIUS II. And before each date there is a capital Latin letter "I" (from Jesus).

The artist in this portrait is clearly overdoing it. He put the letter "I" not only in front of the numbers of the year, but also in front of the numbers that mean the days of the month. So, probably, he showed his servile admiration for the Vatican "viceroy of God on earth."

And here, completely unique from the point of view of medieval dating, engraving of the Russian Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya (wife of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich). Historians naturally date it back to 1662. However, it has a completely different date. "From Jesus" 662. The Latin letter "I" here is capitalized with a dot and does not in any way look like a unit. Below, we see another date - the date of birth of the Queen: "From Jesus" 625, i.e. 625 "from the birth of Christ".

We see the same letter "I" with a dot before the date in the portrait of Erasmus by the German artist Albrecht Durer of Rotterdam. In all art history reference books, this drawing is dated 1520. However, it is quite obvious that this date is being interpreted erroneously and corresponds to 520th year "from the birth of Christ".

Another engraving by Albrecht Durer: "Jesus Christ in the Underworld" is dated in the same way - 510 year "from the birth of Christ".

This old plan of the German city of Cologne has the date that modern historians read as 1633. However, here, too, the Latin letter "I" with a dot is completely different from a unit. The correct dating of this engraving means - 633 from the "Nativity of Christ".

The medieval German artist Georg Penz dated his engravings in the same way. 548 "from the birth of Christ" written on this, his, author's monogram.

And on this medieval German coat of arms of Western Saxony, the dates are written without the letter "I" at all. The artist did not have enough space for the letter on the narrow vignettes, he simply neglected to write it, leaving only the most important information for the viewer - the 519th and 527th years. And the fact that these dates "From the Nativity of Christ"- in those days, it was known to everyone.

On this Russian naval map, published during the reign of the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, that is, in the middle of the 18th century, it is quite clearly written: KRONSTADT. Map Marine Accurate. Written and measured by order of Her Imperial Majesty in the 740th year of the fleet by Captain Nogayev ... composed in the 750th year. Dates 740 and 750 are also recorded without the letter "I". But 750 is the 8th century, not the 18th.

Examples with dates can be given indefinitely, but it seems to me that this is no longer necessary. The evidence that has come down to our days convinces us that the Scaligerian chronologists, with the help of simple manipulations, lengthened our history by 1000 years, forcing the public around the world to believe this outright lie.

Modern historians tend to shy away from an articulate explanation of this chronological shift. At best, they simply mark the fact itself, explaining it by considerations of "convenience."

They say this: "VXv‑ Xvicenturies when dating, often, thousands or even hundreds were omitted ... "

As we now understand, medieval chroniclers honestly wrote:

150th year "From the Nativity of Christ"

200th year "From the Nativity of Christ"

150th year "from the birth of Christ" or 200th year "from the birth of Christ", meaning - in modern chronology - 1150th or 1200th

1150s or 1200s n. e.

Years n. e. And only then, the Scaligerian chronologists will declare that it is imperative to add another thousand years to these "small dates".

So they artificially made medieval history old.

In ancient documents (especially the XIV-XVII centuries), when writing dates in letters and numbers, the first letters denoting, as it is believed today, "large numbers", were separated by dots from the subsequent "small numbers" within a dozen or a hundred.

Here is an example of a similar recording of a date (allegedly 1524) on an engraving by Albrecht Durer. We see that the first letter is depicted as a frank Latin letter "I" with a dot. In addition, it is separated by dots on both sides so that it is not accidentally confused with the numbers. Therefore, Dürer's engraving is dated not 1524, but 524 from the "Nativity of Christ".

Exactly the same date is recorded on an engraving portrait of the Italian composer Carlo Brosci, dated 1795. The Latin capital letter "I" with a dot is also separated by dots from the numbers. Therefore, this date should be read as 795 "from the birth of Christ".

And on the old engraving of the German artist Albrecht Altdorfer "The Temptation of Hermits" we see a similar date entry. It is believed to have been made in 1706.

By the way, the number 5 here is very similar to the number 7. Maybe the date is not written here. 509 "from the birth of Christ", and 709? How accurately are the engravings attributed to Albrecht Altdorfer, who allegedly lived in the 16th century, dated today? Maybe he lived 200 years later?

And this engraving shows a medieval publishing mark "Louis Elsevier". The date (allegedly 1595) is recorded with dots and using left and right crescents to record the Latin letters "I" in front of Roman numerals. This example is interesting because right there, on the left tape, there is also a record of the same date in Arabic numerals. It is depicted in the form of the letter "I", separated by a dot from the numbers "595" and is read only as 595 "from the birth of Christ".

Using the right and left crescents separating the Latin letter "I" from the Roman numerals, the dates are recorded on the title pages of these books. The name of one of them: "Russia or Muscovy, called TARTARIA".

But no matter how the dates were recorded in the Middle Ages, never, in those days,

X = 10

The Roman numeral "ten" did not mean "tenth century" or "1000". For this,

M = 1000.

Much later, the so-called "big" figure "M" = thousand a.

This is how, for example, the dates written in Roman numerals looked like after the Scaligerian reform, when an extra thousand years were added to medieval dates. In the first couples, they were still written "according to the rules", that is, separating "large numbers" from "small" ones with dots.

Then they stopped doing it. Simply, the entire date was highlighted with dots.

And in this self-portrait of the medieval artist and cartographer Augustine Hirschvogel, the date was most likely inscribed in the engraving much later. The artist himself left on his works the author's monogram, which looked like this:

But, I repeat once again that in all medieval documents that have survived to this day, including forgeries dated in Roman numerals, the number "X" never meant "one thousand."

X = 10

M = 1000

For this, the "large" Roman numeral "M" was used.

Over time, the information that the Latin letters "X" and "I" at the beginning of the indicated dates meant the first letters of the words "Christ" and "Jesus" was lost. Numerical values ​​were attributed to these letters, and the dots separating them from the numbers were cunningly abolished in subsequent printed editions or, simply, erased. As a result, abbreviated dates, like:

Х.Ш = XIII century

I .300 = 1300 year

"From Christ III century" or "From Jesus the 300th year" began to be perceived as "Thirteenth century" or "One thousand three hundredth year".

This interpretation automatically added a thousand years to the original date. Thus, the result was a falsified date, a millennium older than the real one.

The hypothesis of "negation of a thousand years" proposed by the authors of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovsky, agrees well with the well-known fact that medieval Italians designated centuries not by thousands, but by hundreds:

XIII century = DUCHENTO = Two hundredth years

Before the creation of traditional chronology, there were about two hundred different versions of dates, with which the story was adjusted to fit the biblical concept. Moreover, the range of these options was impressive - more than 3500 years, that is, the period from the "Creation of the world" to "Nativity of Christ" fit into the interval between 3483 and 6984 BC.

And so, in order to bring all these disparate options to a single plausible form, the Jesuit monk Petavius ​​and the chronologist Scaliger were involved in the case.

The chronology of ancient and medieval history, which at the moment is considered the only true one and is studied in schools and universities, was created in the 16th - 17th centuries AD. Its authors are the Western European chronologist JOSEPH SCALIGER and the Catholic Jesuit monk DIONYSUS PETAVIUS.

They brought the chronological spread of dates, so to speak, to a common denominator. However, their dating methods, like those of their predecessors, were imperfect, erroneous, and subjective. And, sometimes, these "mistakes" were of a deliberate (ordered) nature. As a result, the story lengthened by a thousand years, and this extra millennium was filled with phantom events and characters that had never really existed before.

Joseph Scaliger and Dionysius Petavius

Subsequently, some delusions gave rise to others and, growing like a snowball, dragged the chronology of events in world history into the abyss of virtual piles that had nothing to do with reality.

This pseudoscientific chronological doctrine of SCALIGER-PETAVIUS, at one time, was seriously criticized by prominent figures of world science. Among them are the famous English mathematician and physicist Isaac Newton, the prominent French scientist Jean Harduin, the English historian Edwin Johnson, German educators - philologist Robert Baldauf and lawyer Wilhelm Kammaer, Russian scientists - Peter Nikiforovich Krekshin (personal secretary of Peter I) and Nikolai Alexandrovich Morozov, American historian (of Belarusian origin) Emmanuil Velikovsky.

Isaac Newton,Petr Nikiforovich Krekshin, Nikolay Alexandrovich Morozov, Emmanuil Velikovsky

Further, already in our days, the baton of rejection of the Scaligerian chronology was picked up by their followers. Among them - Academician of the "Russian Academy of Sciences", Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Professor, Laureate of the State Prize of Russia, Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko(the author of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" in co-authorship with the candidate of mathematical sciences Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky), Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Doctor of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Lenin Prize Laureate, Professor Mikhail Mikhailovich Postnikov and a scientist from Germany - historian and writer Yevgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich.

Anatoly Timofeevich Fomenko, Gleb Vladimirovich Nosovsky, Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Kalashnikov, Evgeny Yakovlevich Gabovich

But, in spite of the selfless research work of these scientists, the world historical community still uses in its scientific arsenal, as a standard, the foundations of the vicious "Scaligerian" chronology. Until now, there is no complete, fundamental and objective research on the "Chronology of the Ancient World" that meets the modern requirements of historical science.

How dates were recorded in the Middle Ages

In the XV, XVI and XII centuries, after the introduction into circulation of the "JULIAN", and then, and the "GRIGORIAN" calendar, leading the chronology "FROM THE BIRTH OF CHRIST", the dates were written in Roman and Arabic numerals, but not like today, but TOGETHER WITH LETTERS.

But they have already managed to “forget” about it.

In medieval Italy, Byzantium and Greece, dates were written in Roman numerals.

« ROMAN NUMERALS, the numbers of the ancient Romans, -said in the encyclopedia, - The system of Roman numerals is based on the use of special characters for decimal places:

C = 100 (centum)

M = 1000 (mille)

And their halves:

V = 5 (quinque)

L = 50 (quinquaginta)

D = 500 (quingenti)

Natural numbers are written by repeating these numbers. Moreover, if the larger number comes before the smaller one, then they add up

IX = 9

(the principle of addition), if the smaller one is in front of the larger one, then the smaller one is subtracted from the larger one (the principle of subtraction). The last rule applies only to avoid repeating the same number four times. "

I = 1

V = 5

X = 10

Why, exactly, and only such signs were used for small numbers? Probably, at first, people operated on small values. Only later did large numbers come into use. For example, more than fifty, hundreds, and so on. Then new, additional signs were required, like:

L = 50

C = 100

D = 500

M = 1000

Therefore, it is logical to believe that the signs for small numbers were the original, earliest, MOST ANCIENT. In addition, initially, in writing Roman numerals, the so-called system of "addition and subtraction" of signs was not used. She appeared much later. For example, the numbers 4 and 9, in those days, were written like this:

9 = VIIII

This is clearly seen in the medieval Western European engraving by the German artist Georg Penz "TIME TRIUMPH" and on the old book miniature with a sundial.

Dates in the Middle Ages according to the "JULIAN" and "GRIGORIAN" calendars, leading chronology from the "CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY", were written in letters and numbers.

X = "Christ"

The Greek letter "Xi", before the date written in Roman numerals, once meant the name "Christ", but then it was changed into the number 10, denoting ten centuries, that is, a millennium.

Thus, there was a chronological shift in medieval dates by 1000 years, when later historians compared two different ways of recording.

How were dates recorded in those days?

The first of these methods was, of course, to record the date in full.

She looked like this:

I century from the birth of Christ

II century from the birth of Christ

III century from the birth of Christ

"1st century from the birth of Christ", "2nd century from the birth of Christ", "3rd century from the birth of Christ", etc.

The second way was the abbreviated notation.

Dates were written like this:

X. I = from Christ 1st century

X. II = from Christ II century

X. III = from Christ III century

Etc. where "X" is not the Roman numeral 10, but the first letter in the Greek word for "Christ".

Mosaic image of Jesus Christ on the dome of "Hagia Sophia" in Istanbul

The letter "X" is one of the most common medieval monograms, still found in ancient icons, mosaics, frescoes and book miniatures. She symbolizes the name of Christ. Therefore, they put it in front of the date written in Roman numerals in the calendar leading the chronology "from the CHRIST'S CHRISTMAS", and separated it with a dot from the numbers.

It is from these abbreviations that the designations of centuries adopted today arose. True, the letter "X" is already read by us not as a letter, but as the Roman numeral 10.

When the date was written in Arabic numerals, the letter "I" was put in front of them - the first letter of the name "Jesus", written in Greek, and, too, was separated by a dot. But later, this letter was declared a "unit", supposedly, meaning "one thousand".

I .400 = from Jesus 400th year

Consequently, the record of the date "I" point 400, for example, originally meant: "From Jesus the 400th year."

This way of writing is consistent with the previous one, since the year I. 400 is the 400th

From Jesus 400th year= 400th year from the beginning X. I in n. e. = X. 1st century

Year "From the Nativity of Jesus" or "400th year from the beginning X. 1st century AD e. "

Here is a medieval English engraving, allegedly dated 1463. But if you look closely, you can see that the first number one (ie, one thousand) is not a number at all, but the Latin letter "I". Exactly the same as the letter on the left in the word "DNI". Incidentally, the Latin inscription "Anno domini" means "from the Nativity of Christ" - abbreviated as ADI (from Jesus) and ADX (from Christ). Consequently, the date written on this engraving is not 1463, as modern chronologists and art historians claim, but 463 "from Jesus", i.e. "From the Nativity of Christ."

This old engraving by the German artist Johans Baldung Green bears his author's stamp with the date (allegedly 1515). But with a strong increase in this stigma, you can clearly see at the beginning of the date the Latin letter "I" (from Jesus) exactly the same as in the author's monogram "IGB" (Johannes Baldung Green), and the number "1" is written differently here.

This means that the date on this engraving is not 1515, as modern historians claim, but 515 from the "Nativity of Christ".

The title page of the book by Adam Olearius "Description of the trip to Moscow" shows an engraving with a date (allegedly 1566). At first glance, the Latin letter "I" at the beginning of the date can be taken as a unit, but if we look closely, we will clearly see that this is not a number at all, but a capital letter "I", exactly the same as in this fragment from an old handwritten German text.

Therefore, the real date of the engraving on the title page of the medieval book of Adam Olearius is not 1656, but 656 year from the "Nativity of Christ".

The same capital Latin letter "I" appears at the beginning of the date on an old engraving depicting the Russian Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich Romanov. This engraving was made by a medieval Western European artist, as we already understand now, not in 1664, but in 664 - from the "Nativity of Christ".

And in this portrait of the legendary Marina Mnishek (wife of False Dmitry I), the capital letter "I" at high magnification does not at all look like number one, no matter how we try to imagine it. And although historians attribute this portrait to 1609, common sense tells us that the true date of the engraving was 609 from the "Nativity of Christ".

On the engraving of the medieval coat of arms of the German city of Nuremberg it is written in large: "Anno (ie, date) from Jesus 658". The capital letter "I" in front of the date digits is depicted so clearly that it is impossible to confuse it with any "unit".

This engraving was made, no doubt, in 658 from the "Nativity of Christ"... By the way, the two-headed eagle, located in the center of the coat of arms, tells us that Nuremberg in those distant times was part of the Russian Empire.

Exactly the same, the same capital letters "I" can be seen in the dates on the old frescoes in the medieval "Chilienne Castle", located in the picturesque Swiss Riviera on the shores of Lake Geneva near the city of Montreux.

The dates "from Jesus 699 and 636", historians and art historians, today, read as 1699 and 1636, explaining this discrepancy, the ignorance of illiterate medieval artists who made mistakes in writing numbers.

In other ancient frescoes, Shilienskongo Castle, dated already in the eighteenth century, that is, after the Scaligerian reform, the dates are written, from the point of view of modern historians, "correctly". The letter "I", which meant earlier, " from the birth of Jesus", Is replaced by the number" 1 ", that is, - a thousand.

In this old portrait of Pope PIUS II, we clearly see not one, but immediately, three dates. Date of birth, date of accession to the papal throne and date of death of PIUS II. And before each date there is a capital Latin letter "I" (from Jesus).

The artist in this portrait is clearly overdoing it. He put the letter "I" not only in front of the numbers of the year, but also in front of the numbers that mean the days of the month. So, probably, he showed his servile admiration for the Vatican "viceroy of God on earth."

And here, completely unique from the point of view of medieval dating, engraving of the Russian Tsarina Maria Ilyinichna Miloslavskaya (wife of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich). Historians naturally date it back to 1662. However, it has a completely different date. "From Jesus" 662. The Latin letter "I" here is capitalized with a dot and does not in any way look like a unit. Below, we see another date - the date of birth of the Queen: "From Jesus" 625, i.e. 625 "from the birth of Christ".

We see the same letter "I" with a dot before the date in the portrait of Erasmus by the German artist Albrecht Durer of Rotterdam. In all art history reference books, this drawing is dated 1520. However, it is quite obvious that this date is being interpreted erroneously and corresponds to 520th year "from the birth of Christ".

Another engraving by Albrecht Durer: "Jesus Christ in the Underworld" is dated in the same way - 510 year "from the birth of Christ".

This old plan of the German city of Cologne has the date that modern historians read as 1633. However, here, too, the Latin letter "I" with a dot is completely different from a unit. The correct dating of this engraving means - 633 from the "Nativity of Christ".

The medieval German artist Georg Penz dated his engravings in the same way. 548 "from the birth of Christ" written on this, his, author's monogram.

And on this medieval German coat of arms of Western Saxony, the dates are written without the letter "I" at all. The artist did not have enough space for the letter on the narrow vignettes, he simply neglected to write it, leaving only the most important information for the viewer - the 519th and 527th years. And the fact that these dates "From the Nativity of Christ"- in those days, it was known to everyone.

On this Russian naval map, published during the reign of the Russian Empress Elizabeth Petrovna, that is, in the middle of the 18th century, it is quite clearly written: KRONSTADT. Map Marine Accurate. Written and measured by order of Her Imperial Majesty in the 740th year of the fleet by Captain Nogayev ... composed in the 750th year. Dates 740 and 750 are also recorded without the letter "I". But 750 is the 8th century, not the 18th.

Examples with dates can be given indefinitely, but it seems to me that this is no longer necessary. The evidence that has come down to our days convinces us that the Scaligerian chronologists, with the help of simple manipulations, lengthened our history by 1000 years, forcing the public around the world to believe this outright lie.

Modern historians tend to shy away from an articulate explanation of this chronological shift. At best, they simply mark the fact itself, explaining it by considerations of "convenience."

They say this: "VXv‑ Xvicenturies when dating, often, thousands or even hundreds were omitted ... "

As we now understand, medieval chroniclers honestly wrote:

150th year "From the Nativity of Christ"

200th year "From the Nativity of Christ"

150th year "from the birth of Christ" or 200th year "from the birth of Christ", meaning - in modern chronology - 1150th or 1200th

1150s or 1200s n. e.

Years n. e. And only then, the Scaligerian chronologists will declare that it is imperative to add another thousand years to these "small dates".

So they artificially made medieval history old.

In ancient documents (especially the XIV-XVII centuries), when writing dates in letters and numbers, the first letters denoting, as it is believed today, "large numbers", were separated by dots from the subsequent "small numbers" within a dozen or a hundred.

Here is an example of a similar recording of a date (allegedly 1524) on an engraving by Albrecht Durer. We see that the first letter is depicted as a frank Latin letter "I" with a dot. In addition, it is separated by dots on both sides so that it is not accidentally confused with the numbers. Therefore, Dürer's engraving is dated not 1524, but 524 from the "Nativity of Christ".

Exactly the same date is recorded on an engraving portrait of the Italian composer Carlo Brosci, dated 1795. The Latin capital letter "I" with a dot is also separated by dots from the numbers. Therefore, this date should be read as 795 "from the birth of Christ".

And on the old engraving of the German artist Albrecht Altdorfer "The Temptation of Hermits" we see a similar date entry. It is believed to have been made in 1706.

By the way, the number 5 here is very similar to the number 7. Maybe the date is not written here. 509 "from the birth of Christ", and 709? How accurately are the engravings attributed to Albrecht Altdorfer, who allegedly lived in the 16th century, dated today? Maybe he lived 200 years later?

And this engraving shows a medieval publishing mark "Louis Elsevier". The date (allegedly 1595) is recorded with dots and using left and right crescents to record the Latin letters "I" in front of Roman numerals. This example is interesting because right there, on the left tape, there is also a record of the same date in Arabic numerals. It is depicted in the form of the letter "I", separated by a dot from the numbers "595" and is read only as 595 "from the birth of Christ".

Using the right and left crescents separating the Latin letter "I" from the Roman numerals, the dates are recorded on the title pages of these books. The name of one of them: "Russia or Muscovy, called TARTARIA".

But no matter how the dates were recorded in the Middle Ages, never, in those days,

X = 10

The Roman numeral "ten" did not mean "tenth century" or "1000". For this,

M = 1000.

Much later, the so-called "big" figure "M" = thousand a.

This is how, for example, the dates written in Roman numerals looked like after the Scaligerian reform, when an extra thousand years were added to medieval dates. In the first couples, they were still written "according to the rules", that is, separating "large numbers" from "small" ones with dots.

Then they stopped doing it. Simply, the entire date was highlighted with dots.

And in this self-portrait of the medieval artist and cartographer Augustine Hirschvogel, the date was most likely inscribed in the engraving much later. The artist himself left on his works the author's monogram, which looked like this:

But, I repeat once again that in all medieval documents that have survived to this day, including forgeries dated in Roman numerals, the number "X" never meant "one thousand."

X = 10

M = 1000

For this, the "large" Roman numeral "M" was used.

Over time, the information that the Latin letters "X" and "I" at the beginning of the indicated dates meant the first letters of the words "Christ" and "Jesus" was lost. Numerical values ​​were attributed to these letters, and the dots separating them from the numbers were cunningly abolished in subsequent printed editions or, simply, erased. As a result, abbreviated dates, like:

Х.Ш = XIII century

I .300 = 1300 year

"From Christ III century" or "From Jesus the 300th year" began to be perceived as "Thirteenth century" or "One thousand three hundredth year".

This interpretation automatically added a thousand years to the original date. Thus, the result was a falsified date, a millennium older than the real one.

The hypothesis of "negation of a thousand years" proposed by the authors of "NEW CHRONOLOGY" Anatoly Fomenko and Gleb Nosovsky, agrees well with the well-known fact that medieval Italians designated centuries not by thousands, but by hundreds:

XIII century = DUCHENTO = Two hundredth years

2. The Nativity of Christ in 1152 and His crucifixion in Tsar-Grad in 1185

In the XII century, important events occur, described in the Gospels: the coming of Jesus Christ, his life and crucifixion. However, the text of the Gospels that has come down to us has been edited and refers, most likely, to the XIV-XV centuries.

In the middle of the XII century, in 1152, Jesus Christ is born. In secular Byzantine history, he is known as the Emperor Andronicus and the Apostle Andrew the First-Called. In Russian history, he is described as the Grand Duke Andrei Bogolyubsky. More precisely, Andrei Bogolyubsky is a chronicle reflection of Andronicus-Christ during his stay in Vladimir-Suzdal Russia in the 12th century, where he spent most of his life. The star of Bethlehem actually flared up in the middle of the 12th century. This gives an absolute astronomical dating of the life of Christ [ЦРС], ch. 1. The "Star of Bethlehem" is a supernova explosion, mistakenly attributed today to the middle of the 11th century. The remnants of this outbreak is the modern Crab Nebula in the constellation Taurus.

Is there a date among the absolute astronomical dates of historical monuments that exactly corresponds to the crucifixion of Christ at the end of the 12th century? After all, it is quite possible to expect that such an important event was immortalized in some astronomical image, say, on the zodiac with a horoscope. For example, in "Ancient" Egypt, next to the royal cemetery of the Empire. Let us turn to the dating obtained by us for the "ancient" - Egyptian zodiacs. Recall that the crucifixion of Christ took place on the days of the Jewish Passover, not far from the first spring full moon.

STATEMENT. Among the zodiacs we have dated, there is a zodiac that gives exactly the date of Judean Passover = the date of the first spring full moon. We are talking about the famous Round Dendera Zodiac or, as it is also called, the Zodiac of Osiris, fig. 6. This Zodiac gives the Easter date - the morning of March 20, 1185, and ideally matches the date of the crucifixion of Christ in 1185 [ЦРС], ch. 1. In addition, the date of the Round Zodiac is in good agreement with the dating of the Star of Bethlehem, which flared up around 1150, since it gives about 33 years for the age of Christ.

"Zodiac of Osiris" actually means "Zodiac of Christ", because, according to our research, the "ancient" Egyptian god Osiris meant Jesus Christ, [ЦРС].

Rice. 6. "Ancient" Egyptian Round Dendera Zodiac, L. Vol. IV, PL 21

Virgin Mary, mother of Andronicus-Christ, was from Russia. It is not for nothing that Russia in old documents was sometimes called the House of the Mother of God. Then Maria lived in Tsar-Grad = "antique" Troy. Andronicus-Christ and Mary the Mother of God spent a lot of time in Russia. They fled here, that is, they returned to their homeland, fleeing persecution in Tsar-Grad. This event is described in the Gospels as the flight of the Holy Family to Egypt from King Herod.

The biblical "Egypt" - that is, the Egypt of the "ancient" pharaohs - is Russia-Horde of the XIII-XVI centuries. In the Gospel story we know, the details of Christ's life after fleeing to Egypt, right up to Christ's return to Jerusalem at the age of about 30, are covered in fog. Apparently, Andronicus-Christ and his mother spent a significant part of this time in Russia. In addition, the entire Rus-Horde was previously called "India", and not just the territory of modern Hindustan. This is probably why some medieval texts, now declared apocryphal, asserted that Christ lived in "India" for a long time.

After returning from Russia again to Tsar-Grad (Eros), the emperor Andronicus-Christ (according to Russian chronicles - Grand Duke Andrei Bogolyubsky) carried out important state reforms, limited bribery, made life easier for the common people. Trade and agriculture developed rapidly. But the reforms caused irritation and hatred of the nobility. As a result, a conspiracy took shape in the capital, leading to a bloody rebellion. In 1185, the emperor Andronicus-Christ was deposed and crucified in Tsar-Grad, on Mount Beykos = Evangelical Calvary, on the Asian coast of the Bosphorus, near Eros.

At the top of the mountain there is still a huge "grave" bearing the name: "Yusha's (Jesus) tomb". Beikos is the highest mountain in the Upper Bosphorus, 180 meters above sea level. It is located next to the ruins of the city and the fortress Eros (evangelical Jerusalem). “Yusha's grave” is not the real grave of Jesus, but a large piece of land, about 3 by 17 meters in size, surrounded by a lattice, where Christ was crucified, fig. 7, fig. 8. So to speak, they celebrated the “place of action” that had become sacred, ch. 5.

Not far from the grave of Saint Jusha - Jesus, at the foot of Mount Beykos, there are three more huge graves about 7–8 meters long. These are the tombs of Kirklar Sultan, Uzun Elviya Leblebici Baba and Akbaba Sultan. On the other side of the Bosphorus, that is, on the European coast, there were, as local legends say, several more similar huge graves of saints. This is probably the symbolic burial of the apostles of Jesus Christ.

Rice. 7. The symbolic grave of "Saint Jesus" in Beykos. There is a tall pole with a disc at the edge. It has a golden Arabic inscription. Photo of 1995

So, on the Tsar-Grad Mount Beykos, next to Eros-Jerusalem, miraculously survived (possibly in a rebuilt form) a monument telling about the crucifixion on this place of Andronicus-Christ.

As a result of the coup and bloody riot of 1185, a new dynasty of Angels came to power. It is believed that "Angels" in this case is a generic name. However, it is possible that this word at the time of Andronicus-Christ meant tsarist officials in general. Hence - the angels, "the ranks of the angels," that is, the servants of God, according to the Holy Scriptures. Perhaps this is where the famous story of the Holy Scriptures about Satan - an evil angel who rebelled against God and wanted to become God comes from.

Rice. 8. Complex of structures in Beykos. On the right is a space fenced off with a lattice and a double wall, called the "tomb" of Jesus (Yusha). The plan was drawn up by T.N. Fomenko in 1995

Let us turn to the Byzantine chronicler Nikita Choniates. Regarding Andronicus-Christ, it is said that he is an alien who lived for a long time among the barbarians (as we understand it, in Russia). That he, having come to Tsar-Grad, surrounded himself with barbarian troops, introduced barbarian customs in the country. For example, Russian pants [ЦРС], ch. 2:61. Now the picture becomes clear. Andronicus-Christ was the son of Mary the Mother of God, who came from Russia. Here, in Russia, Andronicus-Christ spent his childhood. Then he lived in Tsar-Grad. Then he returned to Russia and for many years was in these parts already at a mature age. Apparently, not everyone in Tsar-Grad liked Andronicus-Christ's attachment to Russia. And at the acute moment of the political turning point and rebellion, the topic of the foreign origin of Andronicus-Christ surfaced. The rebels began to use it to denigrate the emperor.

Thus, the events described in the Gospels took place in Eros (Jerusalem) on the Bosphorus in the second half of the 12th century. And the city in modern Palestine, today called Jerusalem, was actually "made" in a rather deserted area of ​​the Middle East from the small Arab settlement of Al-Quds not earlier than the 17th or even the 18th century. Declared a center of worship. It has nothing to do with gospel events. The falsifiers of the 17th-19th centuries pursued a clear goal: to transfer - on paper! - evangelical events far away from the real Jerusalem = Tsar-Grad, in order to plunge into oblivion an important part of the true history.

So, the emperor Andronicus-Christ - he is the great Russian prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, he is the apostle Andrew the First-Called - was crucified in Tsar-Grad (Eros) = Jerusalem in 1185.

The gospel life of Christ in GALILE is the stay of Andronicus in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus, in the vicinity of the city of Galich, Kostroma, which in the local dialect was called GALION. The evangelical city of KANA in Galilee, therefore, was a Kansk or Khan settlement in Vladimir-Suzdal Rus. The zero year of the era "from the birth of Christ" was originally, therefore, 1152 AD. e.

Until the epoch of the XVII century, when recording dates, the Roman numeral X, that is, "ten", in the Latin designation of the century (for example, the XI century), was simply the initial letter X of the name Christ. Therefore, the original abbreviation: "XI century" - meant "Christ the First century." That is: the First Century from the Incarnation of Christ. In this case, the letter X was separated by a dot from the following numbers, that is, they wrote X.I, X.II, and so on. This is how the Christian chronology arose. All dates in that era were recorded starting with the name of Jesus Christ, that is, with the letter X or with the letter I. The fact is that the Roman numeral I, that is, "one" - in the Arabic designation of the year, for example 1255, - originally was the first letter I of the name Jesus. Therefore, the expression "1.255 year" at that distant time meant: "from Jesus the 255th year." Until the XVI-XVII centuries, the tradition of writing dates in the form of X. (further numbers come) or I. (numbers follow) was preserved. That is, the letters X and I were separated by dots from the rest of the numbers that denote the actual date. Sometimes, instead of I, J. was used. For numerous examples, see the book by A.T. Fomenko, Ch. 6: 12-13.

After several centuries, namely, in the 17th century, the creation of a "reformist" version of history began. It took the history of the 11th – 16th centuries to be distorted beyond recognition. This was done, in particular, by distorting the chronology. The first letter X (that is, Christ) was cunningly declared in the dates as "ten centuries", and the first letter I (that is, Jesus) was declared the designation "thousand." As a result, the dates were artificially older by about 1000 years. Huge blocks of events of the 11th-17th centuries "went down" for about a thousand years. A phantom "antiquity" emerged.

Our conclusion is in good agreement with the well-known fact that medieval "Italians designated centuries by hundreds: TRECENTO (that is, THREE HUNDREDS) - XIV century, QUATROCHENTO (that is, FOUR HUNDREDS) - XV century, CHINQUECTO (that is, FIVE HUNDREDS) - XVI century" , With. 25. But such names of centuries DIRECTLY INDICATE THE BEGINNING OF THE COUNTING EXACTLY IN THE XI CENTURY, since they ignore the addition of “thousand years” accepted today. It turns out that the medieval Italians did not know any "thousand years". As we now understand, for the simple reason that this “extra thousand years” simply did not exist.

We have described the mechanism of occurrence of one of three major chronological shifts, approximately a thousand years. The reasons for the other two shifts - by about 330 and by 1800 years - are similar and, moreover, are explained by the errors of chronologists of the XIV-XV centuries, who relied on inaccurate astronomical data and methods. In the book by A.T. Fomenko's chronological shifts were conventionally named as follows: 1) the Roman-Byzantine shift for 330-360 years, 2) the Roman shift for 1053 or 1153 years, 3) the Greco-biblical shift for 1780-1800 years.

The Roman-Byzantine shift pushed back into the past and lengthened, in the main, the history of Rome-Byzantium. The Roman shift made the history of the Roman Empire more ancient. The Grecobiblical shift pushed back and lengthened the history of Greece and biblical history.

3. Caesarean section

We all know the medical term "cesarean section" or "cesarean section". That is, when childbirth does not occur naturally, but with the help of an abdominal incision. Why is this incision called "caesarean"? Because according to some information, it was in this way that Julius Caesar or Julius Caesar was born. For example, in the old Russian Palea we read: “The original Roman kingdom of Julius Caesar. In the third year of the reign of Cleopatrina, Julius Caesar began the reign of the reign of Julius Caesar in Rome.

The nickname "flogger" obviously means that he was "flogged" from his mother's womb. That is, it was taken out with the help of a medical operation, by an incision. The womb was cut open, ripped open. This is where the "cesarean section" came from.

But on the other hand, such information has also been preserved about Christ. Although little known today, they are clearly expressed in the canonical church service. For example, in the old Church Slavonic threefold canon of the second voice, read on Sundays at the midnight office. The Irmos of the ninth canon of this canon sounds like this: “Even before the sun of the lamp of God, having reappeared in the flesh, came to us FROM THE SIDE OF A GIRL, ineffably incarnated (option: becoming human), pure blessed: We magnify Theotokos”, p. 66; , With. 134. Here is a translation into modern Russian: "The one who shone forth before the Sun - God's lamp, and came in the flesh FROM THE WOMAN'S SIDE, inexpressibly incarnating, blessed and pure, the Mother of God we magnify."

The words: "came in flesh from the side of a girl's side" is difficult to understand otherwise than being born by Caesarean section from the Virgin. That is, the Nativity of Christ from the Virgin Mary.

The birth of Christ by caesarean section left its mark not only in liturgical texts Orthodox Church... This event was much talked about in the Middle Ages, and from here a whole bunch of different opinions, assumptions, myths grew. The first thing that should be noted is the statement of Orthodox dogma that the Theotokos REMAINED A VIRGIN AFTER CHRISTMAS. Such words are directly present in Orthodox worship, see above. In addition, this topic is discussed in detail in the so-called apocrypha.

Let us explain that until the 17th century in the Christian world there were many different works telling about Christ. In the 17th century, the new government banned them and declared them "apocryphal". Moreover, many of them were considered quite canonical works in the 16th century. They were included in authoritative church collections, copied in monasteries along with the four canonical Gospels, the works of the holy fathers and Christian teachings. One of the methods of denigrating "inconvenient texts" in the 17th century was the following. Some of the "annoying sources" began to be called "Gospels" (although in the Church-Slavic tradition they were not called that). For example, the works attributed to the Apostle Thomas began to be called the "Gospel of Thomas." The idea is clear. The reformers achieved the following goal. Everyone in the Christian world knew very well that at one of the ecumenical councils four canonical Gospels were singled out for worship. The Gospels are texts to be read in the church. They, of course, must be officially approved. In this sense, the rest of the Gospels were rejected. But this did not mean at all that they were rejected altogether. They could remain so-called reading books. They could be kept at home, rewritten. But the crafty reformers, gluing the name "Gospel" to this or that old text that did not suit them, automatically put it under the column of "wrong, forbidden Gospels."

Let's turn to the so-called "First Gospel of Jacob". “And he found (Joseph - Auth.) there a cave ... And the Newborn appeared, went out and took the breast of his mother Mary. And the grandmother exclaimed ... and she left the cave and met Salome, and said to her: Salome, Salome, I want to tell you ABOUT A WONDERFUL Phenomenon: A VIRGIN BIRTH AND SAVED HER VIRGINS ”, p. 217.

Here is another text, the so-called "Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew". “And when Zeloma approached Mary ... she exclaimed in a loud voice: I never suspected or heard anything like it: Her breast is full of milk and Her is a male Child, ALTHOUGH SHE IS A VIRGIN. There was nothing unclean at conception AND NO DISEASE AT BIRTH. She conceived a virgin, she gave birth to a virgin, and she remains a virgin ”, p. 243.

Such insistence of the sources that the Theotokos REMAINED A VIRGIN AFTER BIRTH perfectly corresponds to the birth of Christ by Caesarean section.

It turns out that the Talmud is also written about Christ. However, “the image of Jesus presented by the Talmud is composed of various kinds of Jewish legends, statements of rabbis and just rumors ... It is believed that Jesus appears in the Talmud under various names. It is mentioned several times ... "JESUS, SON OF PANTHIRG ... The origin of the name" son of Pantira "presents a riddle", pp. 301–302.

About PANTHIRA commentators write: "The etymology of the non-Jewish name Pantira has long occupied researchers ... A version was put forward that the name Panther (Pantira) arose as a result of a linguistic error as an incorrect transmission of the Greek word" Parthenos "-" virgin "", p. 305.

In our opinion, the Greek word PARFENOS or PARTENOS, that is, VIRGO, is exactly how the word VIRGO sounds in the Greek Gospels, p. 305, - appeared in the Christian tradition as a memory of the caesarean section at the birth of Christ. PARTENOS comes from the Slavic word POROT, in the sense of ripping open, dissecting the body during a cesarean section. Moreover, perhaps there is a meaning here not only to OPEN, but also to SEW, since PARTENOS resembles the word PORTNOI, that is, a person who flogs and sews up. It is clear that the physician performing the caesarean section must then suture the wound.

And the Talmudic PANTHIRA, most likely, comes (like PARTENOS) from the same Slavic GORGE, PORTNOY. Therefore, the authors of the 19th century, who brought this word closer to PARTENOS, were right.

But then the well-known myth about the birth of the "ancient" goddess Athena "through the cut from the head of Zeus" immediately pops up in my memory. For a long time, researchers drew attention to the identity of the "ancient" Greek Athena Parthenos with the medieval Christian Athenian Mother of God. In the Middle Ages, the famous Athenian Parthenon (that is, the temple of Athena Parthenos) was nothing more than the temple of the Virgin Mary Parthenos, c. 60, 112, 114.

So the Christian origin of the myth of the birth of Athena becomes very transparent. "Zeus ... swallowed his pregnant wife and then, with the help of Hephaestus (or Prometheus), who split his head with an ax, he himself gave birth to Athena, who appeared from his head in full military armor and with a war cry", v. 1, p. 126. Through the fantastic details one can clearly see the birth of Jesus by Caesarean section from the Virgin. Here Virgo = Athena "changed places" with Jesus = Zeus: it is not the Virgin that gives birth to Jesus, but Jesus (Zeus = Zeus) gives birth to the Virgin. The incision during the caesarean section in the "Greek" myth was completely preserved, but "moved" to the head of God. By the way, another person is mentioned here - the doctor who made the incision. Called Prometheus or Hephaestus.

This "ancient" Greek myth could have arisen while looking at the Orthodox icon "The Dormition of the Theotokos", fig. 9 [ЦРС], ch. 2. The Theotokos lies on her deathbed, and above her stands Christ and holds in his hands, at the level of his shoulder, a small, swaddled in white cloth, a figurine of the Mother of God.

Rice. 9. Russian icon "Assumption of the Virgin". XIII century, icon 11

Of course, a person who is well versed in icon painting knows that a small figurine here depicts the soul of the Mother of God. But a simple person, and even more so one who visits from afar and is poorly familiar with the icon-painting tradition, may well perceive such an image as the birth of a little Virgin from an adult God. Then the fantasy was already working. Since the girl is drawn close to the head of Christ, "it means she was born from the head." Etc. Arriving home in "ancient" Greece of the XIV-XVI centuries from the distant capital of the Great = "Mongol" Empire, the admiring traveler began to share with his fellow citizens "deep knowledge" about the life of the Olympic gods on the distant Olympus. This is how an "antique" myth could be born. It was Russia that was considered the "House of the Mother of God", since in Russia the Virgin Mary spent a significant part of her life and died here [ХР]. Therefore, the original images of the "Dormition of the Virgin" appeared in Russia. And then, as Christianity spread to Western Europe, there also appeared images inspired by these Orthodox icons.

But back to Zeus. It turns out that he gave birth not only to Athena from the head, but also to Dionysus = Bacchus FROM THE HIP: “Zeus, having assumed the appearance of a mortal, had a secret love affair with Semele (“ Earth ”) ... Hera ... advised Semele, who was already six months pregnant, to set a condition for his mysterious lover: let him ... appear in his true guise ... He appeared before her in a roar of thunder and flashing lightning and incinerated her. Hermes, however, managed to save her six-month-old premature son. Hermes STUFFED THE CHILD INTO THE THIGH OF ZEUS, AND THAT, AFTER THREE MONTHS, IN THE RIGHT TIME PROVIDED IT INTO THE LIGHT.

That is why Dionysus is called "twice born" or "child of double doors", p. 69.

In this myth, as in the Jewish texts, Christ, as it were, gives birth to himself from the thigh. Here Zeus = Zeus is Jesus, and Dionysus = God of Nicene is also Jesus. Commentators explained such parallels by allegedly borrowing the basic tenets of Christianity from more ancient pagan beliefs. But in the new chronology, the picture is the opposite. Pagan cults were variants of Christianity prevalent in the Middle Ages. In addition to the main stream of Christianity, there were various of its streams and sects. They were later declared to be the "most ancient pagan" religions. And then, already in the 19th century, they were surprised to find that they were suspiciously similar to Christianity. A wide field of activity appeared for the "scientific explanation" of this phenomenon.

The examples given (many others are indicated in our books of the "golden series" B) show how widespread the myth based on the caesarean section at the birth of Christ was. This event gave rise to a lot of different versions, moreover, in places remote from each other, and in different languages.