Notes on Herbert Illig Phantom Time Theory


New member
Trusted Member
Mar 14, 2021
Reaction score
Phantom Time Theory Notes

on all podcast platforms but heres a link


*i apologize spelling errors, great book though "Guide to the Phantom Time Theory" What do you guys think of this theory?

Chapter 1: The Dark Age
  1. Introduced during the 14th century by italian scholar
  2. Little known between fall of roman empire (476) to beginning of 11th century
    1. Nothing built in 500 but all the beautiful churches and such made in 11th
    2. In this renaissance still read greek/roman philosophers
      1. Historians as far back as 17th century viewed everything between constantine and the reformation as “barbaric”
        1. Which is weird because this was when christianity was growing and strong, they viewed these people as stuipd, much like how people view christians today. Idiots, beliving some fairy tale
        2. Period of faith instead of enlightenment interesting choice of words no?
    3. Vikings were said to have rampaged around the continent during the dark ages, burning, looting, killing
    4. Few documents exist from this time period, very few
    5. Even said anglo-saxons lost the art of pottery making for 300 years, all buildings, stopped
    6. Site after site, zero artifacts for the dark ages
      1. Germanic kings tried to stop it, but eventually the old roman empire just fell into decay
    7. All the goods from the east had disappeared, papyrus( so less reading) not business records
      1. Luckily the arabs would eventually come and teach the european barbarians how to live (i joke)
  3. Lots of questions, and complaints, but for one, it is true the arabs did lots of attakcing in north africa and middle east
    1. Both regions were huge population centers w/ thriving agriculture, well after the arabs attacked they turned into barren wastelands. The arbas would let their camels eat the agriculture, the farmers (infidels) could not say hey dude get your camel off my lawn cuz theyd be killed so, also their wives would be raped and as you can imagine that doesn’t inspire hardwork
    2. Many europeans did retreat to defend the hilltop strongholds during the seventh century, and the arabrs were causing the mediterannean shipping routes to slow because they were pirates
    3. But even w/ their destruction how did it cause 300 years of just nothing? How could it depopulate a whole continent but then 300 yeras later, it exploded?
      1. Also issue w/ this theory is in spain/norht africa arab architecure doesn’t exsist until the 10th century? So you have a horde causing mass damage who doesn’t build a single thing?
      2. Now i know this could be confusing so what happened right? Well the arabs did do this they were attacking and invading north africa and spain and did cause destruction, but not to the degree normal history somewhat tells us
      3. Also the tenth century settlements seemed to be built directly on top of the seventh century literally nothing built
    4. Could it have been a catastrophe?
      1. Lack of rain? Turned middle east to a desert? Maybe, but then why europe also?
      2. Asteroid? Honestly w/ the like depopulation thing, its a possibility?
  4. Roman Empire
    1. Two empires
      1. 1. The one w/ all roads lead to rome, straight roads, city planning 3rd century
      2. Then one who was always on the defensive, constantine
        1. Also had like half barbarian emperors just like the army of rome
      3. So the roman empire getting big in 3rd century, but then a population decline until the 5th century. This was because of their pagan beliefs. Infanticide was common
        1. Lived in poor conditions, pagan worship, no respecting the babies, if it was a girl, slaughtered, appeasing the many gods
        2. Which brings an interesting point, these pagan beliefs weren’t new, they were recycled
        3. Crime was epic proportion, sewage thrown in the streets, watch humans be torn to shreds by wild animals, lol, can’t say we are much more advanced
        4. Sex w/ young children men and women were required if your master said so, the sex industry was booming, hmmm
        5. Rome encouraged abortions, and the population was declining rapidly
          1. How did they maintain their power? Well they just kept bringing in more and more people from neighboring lands
        6. Then they had a literal God Send, christianity took hold in the roman empire?
          1. But after christanity formed rome was acked by goths and vandals, but the seed took hold, the east and mediterannean was building more basilicas and everything (golden ages 5th.6th centuries )
          2. Rome during the late 5th century was lazy, they didn’t do anything, kind of like america, jus timported everything and they got cut off and now materials of north africa/middle east were being set elsewhere
          3. But late 6th it bounces back, realizing they need to make stuff
        7. Spain was one of the most advanced centers of roman empire also first to fully adopt christanity
          1. Christanity also saw flolurishign cultures in france, scotland, britain
          2. Christianity created a more humane culture, which makes sense, wife, children, not infanticide, slaugther, sex
        8. So during this supposed dark age, churches are built and then everything stops, and picks back up 300 yeras later. It is impossible to tell if church was built in this 6, 7th century or 10th 11th, so i guess the roman empire never really fell just morphed into what we think as of medieval period
        9. Seventh century fortresses were supposedly replaced w/ larger 11th century what we see today (no 8th, 9th)
          1. Castle age building in souther europe occurred in seventh only began in northern europe in the tenth (no more then few kilometers apart?)
          2. Fortified hilltop sites southern coast of france 7th, few km in pyrenean foothills castles appear in tenth
          3. In pyrenees mountains a stronghold to guard against mustlim raids in 10th centuries, few km another castle 7th century
        10. In france you have merovingian remains until sixth century ahd chlothar 2 (584-629) and then nothing, restarted w/ otto in the 10th
      4. Not just in france Britain has the same thing (london, canterbury, chester) all roman names, kept roman names even though population was totally replaced by barbarians in 5th century
        1. Normal history says its because vikings burned all the centers/castles down, but yet no remains are found of this burning
        2. Swedish vikings were supplying slaves to the muslims in th eseventh century, vikings contained islam coins minted in seventh century
        3. Norwegian arrived in iceland in the ninth century, the homes look like merovingian of the seventh century
        4. Zero sites that can produce both merovingian and carolingian items
      5. Merovingians to carolingians to Otto all have roman style and such over 4 centuries?
        1. If you didn’t know because of inscriptions, you would think Otto would be dated to the sixth century
        2. 2 kings of carolingians Louis and Lothair- Merovingian names ? are
          1. Clovis and Clothair
        3. Carolingina monuments of Charlamagne’s famous chapel built around 800 (supposedly) could not have been built before mid eleventh century
          1. Coins excavated in Sardis (italy) 491-616 1011 coins
            1. Rest of 7th 90
            2. Eight and ninth combined less then 9
    2. Not just in europe, Islamic world as well (middle east and north Africa, blacnk for 3 centuries
      1. EGYPT
        1. Largest most populated islamic territory during early middle ages, muslim conquest happened 638, you would think they would build mosques
        2. Nope, the mosques dated from eleventh century
        3. Why did muslims wait 300 years to build any mosques?
      2. Baghdad million souls 9763-809) left virtually zero trace
      3. No matter where we go spain to syria nothing for 650-950
      4. Lebanon
        1. Tons of evidence then arab conquest 636 (nothing) until crusades 1098--big point we will get to as well crusades but i digress
      5. Arab city Cordoba said to have half million people in 711, not a trace, no architecture, nothing
        1. Now i am skipping factual evidence because ia m confused just talking to you, if you wanna read it, please do

  1. In spain
    1. Nothing of arabs anything of 8th century, they say christians destroyed it all, no evidence of that, they dburn beautiful baths, castles and everything? I don’t buy it
  2. Characters/epochs of the seventh century seem to echo in the tenth
    1. 7th century central europe was suffering from destructive raids of the avars (nomad race from the steppesin german speaking alps/bavaria
    2. 10th century destructive raids of the magyars (nomad race from steppes) into german speaking alps/bavaria
    3. 7th century france controlled by merovingian Clovis and Chlothar
    4. 10th century france controlled by carolingian louis and lothar
    5. Roman architecture of the tenth bears resemblance to the merovingian/visigothic architecture of the seventh
    6. Royals of 10th still dressing like roman caesars of centuries before
    7. European monasteries in possession of huge collections of greek roman literature of the ancients (no one else)
    8. Events that historians would expect to occur only in tenth
      1. Begin 3 centuries earlier as castle building
        1. So how we said earlier romans were defended hilltops, often made of wood and that was in the 7th, well then in the 10th the hilltop forts were build w/ stone and the castles we see today. No structures inbetween?
        2. Isn’t that weid, they chose the exact same spot, 300 years later? No computers, no nothing? Exact spot?
  3. ISlam had signifiant impact on europe in the early middle ages
    1. Then stops? And then starts again 300 years later in the tenth?
    2. Whole series of paper making, algebra, zero, which they supposedly qacuired in the seventh didn’t reach europe until the late 10th? Well what the hell happened in those 300 yeras?
    3. Christians europeans were sneaking into muslim contorlled regions of sicily and spain trying to learn alchemical knowledge of the saracens
    4. Crusading is awfully similar to something in the muslim religion, “jihading” but took christians 400 years? Lol hilariuos
      1. So christians, pacisifst religion, gets raped and pillages by arabs in 7th century. They say, okay you win, rape my wife and then they wait 400 years to strike back? Christians lost half its territory ¾ in population, but said, we will get them another time?
    5. But like I said islam also has dubious made up history
      1. Mohammed bin qasim (islamic conquest of india 710)
      2. Sounds like the islamic conquest of india by mohammed of ghazni in 1010
    6. Scottish king macbeth died at dusinann castle in supposedly mid 11th century (should be a medival castle at the site, nope, an iron age fort from mid 8th century, 300 years earlier those things were made)
  4. Vikings
    1. Often thought they were cool bad ass people, well they were also kidnapping european christians and selling them as slaves to the arabs
      1. Russia to brithsih isles selling them to the caliphate
        1. Supposedly this happened in the 9th century, but they have 7th century islamic coins?
        2. Thru migrations and such you would expect vikings around the 7th, but history says no ignore evidence they were around the 9th
      2. Already showed viking settlements like 7th century merovingian houses on iceland, they are just behind the times i guess
      3. So either vikings getting 200 year old coins from the muslims OR it wasn’t the 9th century
      4. English King oFfa (mid 8th) has a gold coin w/ arabic legend on it/date
        1. Issue is that arab gold din’t arrive into europe until the ninth w/ the viking slave trade
        2. So he mimiced arab gold a half a century at minimum before he knew it existed, damn cool super power
      5. 620 everything stops no coins, nothing and then boom 920 villages, everything poof reappears
CHapter 3: Mythical Three Centuries
  1. Dark age and definitive end of greco/roman civlizatrion was direct result of arrival of Islam
    1. Powerful statement, wait until we get to Mohammed, probably get beheaded when I talk about it
    2. But they claim dark ages happened cuz of arab blockade and trade, or possible natural catastophrie
  2. So if true, we would see population/architecture increase in arab countries and decrease in europe and in north africa, but like i said before towns seemlingly built right on top of 7th century like literally nothing happened at all
  3. Now this theory causes a bunch of problems then it solves
    1. Lots of chronicles and documents exist from the dark ages between 600-900
    2. If this is true and europe added 300, why would islam? They don’t work together
      1. But like i said earlier, islam also has missing archalogical evidence in this dark age period
      2. Also islam has a A.H calendar which supposedly matches up w/ ours, in regards to the possibly non existent prophet muhammad
    3. So normally it sthought of that the anno domini came right when constantine switched to christianity, that is incorrect
      1. Wehn constantine got power, romans had tons of calendars, some time of alexander, some julius caesar, some augsuts
      2. Dated regnal yeras of the emperors
      3. Urbe condita9 dated according to the yeras that elapsed since city was founded under romulus
      4. Even when switched to christianity still used until the 5th century
        1. 476 western rome fell, constanople was new power, but all the gothic, vandal, frankish kings had their own record calendar
      5. But most did not count since jesus AD, they counted since the start of earth as in the bible
        1. Christians of this time weren’t that interested in how long since Christ’s birth, what they were interested in was when christ would return
        2. Christ had said they would see the return of the son of man, that this generation would not pass until these times arrived
        3. 4th/5th century christians were hoing that would be soon
          1. Book of revelation john had said that after his return christ would rule earth for a thousand years, the millennium and after that time, the world would come to an end
          2. Christians theorized endlessly when this millenium would begin
          3. Peter 3:8- w/ the lord a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day
          4. Christians began thinking 6 days of creation was 6,000 years, so just a little longer of period of labour and hardwork and hten joyful sabbath
          5. Wanted to see when he would return
            1. Lots of different estimates of how old w/in christanity, but obviously they wanted it soons o they faoved numbers later to hury Christ Return
          6. 11th/12th AD it started
          7. Otto 111 was a christian fanatic (or just religious, fanatic christianity is a phrase I don’t like
            1. But why would he distort the time?
        4. So byzantine even though losing power, germanic rulers had independence but still feared constaninople, none dared to offend them,
        5. Only once before the seventh century did a germanic monarch issue his own image ona coin, found himself at war w/ rome
          1. So it is said w/ byzantine fighting arabs, the western germans 150 yeras later started minting their own coins, under King charles (charlemagne)
          2. Whyd they wait 150 years? Clothar 2 last merovingian started it and then it stopped for 150 years? 620 was clothar?
        6. If we remember the 10th century is actually the seventh, Otto 1 is credited w/ revival in 962 (following the death of charlamagne) so in actuality otto revitalized western europe about two decades after fall of byzantine rome, and minted his own coins, which would make sense
        7. CHarlemagne the great
          1. Ottonians were founders of what might be called Cult of Charlamagne
          2. “In 1000 Otto third found charles relics and uncovered them (died 186 years before him)
          3. Took a tooth from the skull, replaced the missing nose w/ a gold sheet before reburying him
            1. Charlamagne a fake, no arechologists can find anything substantial of him or his empire
            2. His chape, was built in 11th century, but why would Otto invent such a character
          4. Well Otto was claming the title of emperor, he needs some precedent to do so to legitimize himself calling him that. Since no precedent existed, he just made one up
          5. You need time to set a precedent, so he just added some time and made it up
            1. No public libraries, or universal free education
            2. Since no trade w/ papyrus and arabs, literacy rate down, so he literally just made shit up
            3. No one could really read, no one cared about the date
              1. Aeb: tribes in south america and such, have no idea how old they are, just not something that matters
            4. Charles was the precedent (legendary merovingian king) Otto needed the precedent
          6. Now you may be thinking? Impossible? No way?
        8. How many of our fellow americans could tell you about our president 150 years go? Many do, they spit out the lie they’ve been told abe lincoln great president blah blah blah (if they even know that thats when the civil war happened, they probably don’t though.
        9. So imagine a place where 99 less info, they’d believe w/e you told them
        10. So AD introduce w/ otto 3 and the phantom history was written
          1. Makes sense, why would rome revival happen 3 centuries after rome’s existence been dimmed? No one would have even known lol
        11. Here is where more interesting. Otto was crowned by pope John in 662 (rather then 992 as history says)
          1. Europe needs a leader who can stop the muslim raiders, byzantine rome is done for, christians, catholics, europe needs help
          2. North has viking attacks, east by hungarians, south arabs, emperor and pope say oh shit
          3. Luckily in 30 years, christian takes root in hungary, vikings are pushed back and christianity is winning w/ Ottonian emperors in power
          4. Also otto being a big christ fan, makes his rule at the change of the millennium, he thinks christ is coming back then, so he will forever live hand in hand w/ christ
            1. So w/ the pope on 701 nyd, it became 1001.
        12. Also there were two alexander areas calendars used in the eastern roman empire. 1, since death of alexander 293 yeras BEfore the other alexandrine emperor which was when emperor augustus visited his tomb.
        13. This is how the west also confused the eastern empire w/ teh yeras dated, they didn’t really know which one they went by, lots of confusion, otto captialized on that confusion w/ the pope.
  4. Dark Age Chronicles
    1. Thousands of documents, also byzantine and islamic world also agree, byzantines MAYBE would cooperate, but islam? No way
    2. According to illig all documents were written in the eleventh, twelfth and thirteent, none from when they claim
    3. Lots of forgeries in this time period, could set precedent like otto
      1. One was a forgery that constantine gave the pope all this land all over teh world, for curing constantine leprosy and baptizing him
      2. Lots of work went into this forgery, but obviously would empower the church, forgery was a booming business
      3. So after otto 3 time manipulation, the monks of the western monasteries were very busy providing this false history
        1. More and more dark age documents proven to be forgeries (50%) of dark age documents have been proven to be false
        2. Aflred the great (englihs king) also made up
        3. Illig’s theories say maybe these people existed but did not do what they claimed they do or they lied about the time frame, like a embellished story
          1. Charlamagne is very similar to theodoric (king of ostrogoths controlled italy and western europe during late fifth and early sixth centuries/a merovingian king
          2. Theodebert 1 who waged war against justinian in italy during sixth century, claimed title of emperor of the west, this is why no muslims fighting, they didnt exsist yet
      4. Viking raids are said to have continued until 1050 but reality 640-750 100 yeras made look like 250 years of raiding (thats a long power)
      5. People argue about this like why would otto make up the nose story!
        1. Well in otto’s family he had an ancestor known as carolus nazon 480-516, he was missing part of his nose, he is called Charlie the nose!
      6. So clear duplication, sometimes triplication of people and invention is used
So back to How is Christian and Muslim Character in agreement?
  1. In middle east and north africa there is a dark age in mid seventh/ mid tenth which should not exist
  2. This is wehn islam is believed to have its apex of wealth and learning, said to be islam’s golden age, arab was the world teacher and master
  3. Rough part, not a trace of it exists!
    1. Islamic calendar counts A H Hijra of muhammad his flight from mecca to medina (622) completely matches w/ the AD calendar of europe w/ major events and dates
    2. Muslims did not use the AH before the christian use of AD, muslims derived the AH from the dates of the christian AD
      1. Example- muslim coins which use AH also give AD date side by side
      2. Early history of islam is distored for propaganda, muhammad didn’t even exsist in the sixth/seventh century when they say he did (if he did)
    3. This is huge
      1. Islam is closely connected w/ the ebionite or nazarite cult, sect of christianity which was declared heretical at council of nicea in 325, disappeared from the world stage, its people retreated into arabia
        1. Muhammad was connected to the ebionites that actually lived sometime near the council of nicea
        2. Interesting council of nicea occurred 297 years BEFORE date of muhammad’s hirja from mecca (say that again) 622
        3. 297 precise number of fictitious years added by Otto 3, so just a coincidence i guess
      2. Whole narrative of islam early history, includign life of muhammad is ficticious
        1. “Islamic coins which match dates”
      3. Except they are exact copies of the sassanid persian originals
        1. These cois have the sassanid emperor and reverse a zoroastrin fire temple
      4. Earliest islam coin has a 31 equalling 651 in christian calendar
      5. First islamic ruler to imprint his name was caliph year 41 (661
        1. Apart form name it looks persian, temple of fire still onreverse
      6. Muhammad occurs on persian coins rather then syrian in 66 (685), these mints still have rulers name written in persian, last muslim coins are dated 89 )708) no images and both sides arabic writing
    4. Islamic coins have issues
      1. 7th century coin in 7th century building and so on right? Wrong
      2. Find coins wildy differing dates in the same strata and sam buildings
      3. All three in one building sometimes, seventh century coins of persian design w/ the fire and temple are found as far north as scandinavia
        1. That of course is the vikings, whose trading relations is known but that was supposed to happen in the ninth century, important in the tenth
        2. So we see either they just gave old coins to vikings, or the time doesnt’ match
      4. So we know north africa, spain, can’t attribute for 300 yeras archeologically, but surely the middle easy mesopotamia, iran can provide this much needed evidence of islam’s golden age
        1. All stories say that this was teh heart of hte empire, ornamented cities w/ mosques baths, baghdad grew into ane xploding metropolis in 762 blah blah blah, population excess 1million
        2. Welp, there aint shit there, they say well its actually right under the modern city and so they can’t keep excavating, its under there though
        3. Another story baghdad capital moved to samarra in 892, huge city millions best city, gardens so beautiful, well then it was destroyed, of course no layer exists.
        4. Siraf a settlement occupied continuously throughout the dark ages, ruins can only show a bazaar site all from tenth century
        5. Arab histories say caliph al mutasim was destined to establish is new capital in 836. Prior it had been a wasteland, but the caliph that the city would be rebuilt by a great powerful king, unfortunately for the story, samarra was already a large and important center under the sassanids, maintained until the islamic leaders took over it
        6. More inaccurate historial things that don’t make sense, read the book for more, theres so many fake cities that no evidence, the encyclopedia irania refutes these claims by saying that the guy who dug the stuff up didn’t pay attention to strata so theres just no way of proving the stories, but they are real!
      5. Pottery of 10th/11th century mesopotamia is indistginushiable from the 8th and 9th
      6. Arab history tells us that samarra a vast royal metropolis constructed in 9th century, inhabited for 50 yeras then abandoned due to europes dark age, but of course shows people lived there for another 300 yeras.
      7. Only evidence is islam coins which match the date, but islamic coins made it to scandinavia 2 centuries before they were expected, they are found alongside other century later coins, is this really evidence? How long do you hold a penny for? Or any cash? 300 yeras?
    5. Official breakoff point of classical civilization and medieval is 614 when syria/palestine and jerusalem fall to the persian forces, supposedly muslim forces did not emerge from arabia until after muhammads death in 638
      1. Forgery letter of muhammad to the king of telling him he better convert but it also talks about how much they hate the christians adn the byzantines (forgery) but sets precedent islam and christians have not gotten along for a long time
      2. So arabs and persians combined powers as arabs were in the persian army and in jerusalem took it 614 and for good measure carried out a general slaugther of the christian population, looted churches, took sacred relics, including the holy cross which christ was crucified
      3. (they make no mention of how 10 yeras earlier Chrosoes persian king) was deftead by the byzantines, they named him undefeatable
        1. He was then killed by his own son because his son desired his father’s beautiful wife….no comment
      4. So what probably happened was the persians encountered islam in syria, saw a valuable ally against byzantium and joined forces w/ the arabs
        1. Probably senior members of the persian ruling class converted to islam and gradually imposed on its populace
      5. The normal story is the arabs conquered the mighty and invincible persian empire that had withstood romes to subdue it for centuries
        1. Then some dudes on some camels took down the most powerful force again...riding camels
        2. This is why islam has many persian symbols, the crescent moon enclosing a star
        3. Great islamic cities baghdad and samarra followed persian ground plan w/ the paradises or ornamental gardens
        4. Pottery is persian
        5. Caliphs ruled tru a persian bureacryc, earliest coins, persian w/ an added phrase on them
        6. Some coins w/ no arabic are still attributed to islam because there was no animosity or battle like the arabs said
    6. Story goes that Yazdegerd 3 was the last pre islamic rulers, and the caliph conqured the country
      1. Famous poet of the time and area never mentions this powerful caliph
      2. What he does talk about is a civil war between the persian and islamic converts
      3. Islamic propagandist would skew this as a conquest of persia, but literally everything about islamic origins cannot hold up to arechological evidence
  4. Quran
    1. Now i have a mosque by my house, if i go dark on twitter for a few days, I will want you to reach out to olivia allen and if she is unavailable, please look for my head rolling on the street I joke
    2. Could not have been written wehn tradition says and the very existence of muhammad is calle dinto question.
      1. Oh this was my favorite part- the quran is mistranslated all over the place but the part where 72 virings are promised to a martyr what was actually offered was 72 raisins, or grapes LMAO
      2. The original language of the quran was not arabic but syriac or aramic where smae word translates to grapes, not virgins
    3. Was originally a syriac christian devotional text, ahd nothing to do w/ muhammad or islam,
    4. Even early islamic coins were based on persian mints, some had a cross w/ a figure on them, also w/ the name muhammed on them
      1. Often ignored because you see the issue there, it violates the principles fundamental to the islamic faith
      2. You cannot display an image of muhammad, and even worse hes HOLDING A CROSS
      3. The cross is an anti sign in islam
      4. So maybe its not even muhammad but Jesus and they scribbled muhammad after the fact
    5. Muhammad in arabic and syriac means “praised one” or “chosen one”
      1. Never talked about before the 7th century, unlikely anyone named existed in arabia before this time
      2. No one names kid that, so most likely the muhammad next to the man holding a cross, is not a prophet of islam, but Jesus of Nazareth
      3. No early texts of 8th century which refer to muslims mention muhammad or quran
        1. This means the “islam” which conquered the middle east and norht Africa was not the islam which we know now
    6. Quran full of characters like adam, noah, abraham, moses and jesus
      1. Even speaks of last days when antichrist will appear and Jesus will return to judge mankind, pretty christian viewpoint
      2. Vocabulary of quran is non arabic
      3. If muhammad exsisted when he did he was practicing arabian paganism until manhood
        1. So not surprising that islam is traced to israel and syria, not the middle east/arabia
        2. The books of the torah are found in the quran
        3. Same injunction to conquer promise land in torah is found in the quran (same laws all over the place) both have circumcision, divorce, governing same foods permitted and not permitted, same method of slaughter
          1. Sounds more like islam was a sect of judiasm doesn’t it?
    7. There was a group that regarded jesus as an orthodox jew and demanded folower accept the law of MOses (ebionites or nazarites)
      1. Large following of nazarites in the arabian peninsula, called arabian christianity
      2. Jesus was acceptd as messiah but not son of god, messenger of god
      3. So basically centuries before supposed muhammad exsisted in arabia a proto islam
      4. Here is where it gets crazy, ebionites were strongly jewish but they were a very militant sect
        1. They thought the ideal messiah would be a military commander, a peaceful messiah did not make sense
        2. So after Jesus they thought well he didn’t fight anyone, and by this point the ebionites beliefs and practices were considered muslim
        3. Islamic tradition even says ebionite christians of arabia were the most feverent and first of the new faith
    8. In the bible Jesus of new testament obviously a pacifist, but Joshua of the old testament was not, isralite tribes after death of moses and traveled from arabia into canaan. Exterminated the natives, he was carrying out divine injunction
      1. Arabs of 6th/7th illiterate, you can see how they could confuse tehse stories
      2. Ebionite stories stressed obedience law of moses “eye for eye, stoning women to death for adultery
  5. Quran supposedly holy book given by gabriel the angel
    1. Its a very puzzling document, unrelenting incidents and statements
    2. To understand u need the hadith which is a collections of traditions about the life of muhammad which explains the obscure events and statements of the quran
    3. Hadith didn’t show up until century after supposed muhammad death, industry of hadith writing, most fake
    4. Abbasid caliphs sponsored production of hadith during 8th/9th centuries for political reason
      1. Some hadith actually contradict each other
    5. Every 5th sentence or so teh quran doesn’t make any sense
      1. Its because it was actually composed in a language other then arabic and imperfectly transcribed to a latter tongue
      2. Written in syriac translated to arabic
      3. Confusing things in quran make sense once read in syriac
      4. And once translated to syriac it becomes a christian devotional text
        1. It was meant as a lectionary scriptures from both old and new testament
        2. Not as a replacement book
      5. Quran has 5 mentions of muhammad which could easily mean chosen one as jesus in syriac, theres also many more mistranslations like a “night of power” which is the night gabriel talked to muhammad supposedly but the translation in syriac would read the birth of jesus was as powerful as a 10000 nights
  6. Entire islam was a fabrication put together in the 8th and 9th century
    1. Muhammad was a myth invented in 700-730 to unite a huge arabian empire that existed
    2. It gave them reason to conquer huge swaths of land and muslim spread from lbya to the borders of india
    3. Byzantine has a destruction layer when arabs took over, iran and middle east does not, which indicates clealry the story of muslim take over was more of just an absorbtion, not men riding camels striking down the huge persian empire
  7. When one civilization converts to another faith it usually embraces a heresy of that faith
    1. Rompan empire from judaism to christianity, persian king christianity to islam
    2. If Chosroes the persian emperor converted to his wif’es christianity (ebionite background) the story of islam makes much more sense
    3. No way camels conquered byzantine and persians, and the story of “rightly guided caliphs” w/ not a single coin or artifact in their names were invented to disguise the arab usurpation of the sassanid empire
    4. The islamic coins of chosroes make more sense, it wasn’t because a caliph made a coin w/ an old sassanid emperor on it, its because they were made while he converted to this ebionite christianity known as islam
  8. Age of Hegira then makes no sense, no early coins say this, only latter
    1. Chosroes 2nd converted as early as 590 ad, AH only occurs on coins in 11th century in conjunction w/ the AD, the two dates appear on the coin side by side
    2. So this means 11th century islam adopted a calendar from a created prophet and made up this history like the added years form the christina calendar. Does this make sense to you?
    3. Again as a reminder 297 years elapsed between council of nicea 325 when ebonitism was a heresy and its followers retreated into arabia and 622 when muhammad supposed to fled from mecca to median the AH
    4. So muslims followe dhcristians in the phantom years and inserted a prophet so just like the christians made up a whole backstory and also duplicated kings and such which is why we have zero achreological evidence, why coins of 3 centuries lay side by side
CHapter 5: Reonstructing the Seventh Century
1.europe middle ages divided into two separate phrases
1.beginning of 6th and seventh centuries
2.beginning latter 10th century
  1. 6th/7th
    1. Slik secret smuggled out of china, double masted ships to be able to sail into the wind, moldboard plow temperate europe to break the heavy damp soils of the region, and horseshoe, violins, bagpipe
      1. But after all of these ideas, the dark ages happened
      2. It is true arabs turned fertile grounds into wastelands (north africa, middle east) and people ditched the roman cities and made hilltop forts, which led to castles
      3. Its true europe was now on its own, no resources from mediteranean unless you were arab pirates
      4. So it makes no sense that impact of islam only are felt in europe 300 years later in the tenth century, when sould have been seventh
      5. Even w/ raping and pillaging new ideas take hold, maybe took a little longer, but not centuries longer
  2. The last major action of the seventh that we can say occurred was the sassanid invasion of egypt in around 620
CHapter 6 A strange New World
Post 911 must be reduced by 3 centuries for example
Norman conquest of england not in 1066 but in 766 or 769
  1. Same way first crusade would be 1095 but 795
    1. Again, makes zero sense for the crusades to wait 300 years
    2. Norman invasion of england did not occur 11 centuries after Caesar but 8 hence the roman looking feel of early medeval culture
    3. Roman art w/ merovingians and visigoths which flourished into 7th century
    4. Rome did not truly fall, just developed into medieval civilization
    5. And w/ christianity in full swing europe had a revival of high birth rates and families, not a decline, w/ all those new technologies why would civilization die?
  2. The golden age of the mediterranean was in decline when the arabs took over
    1. The great cities (alexandria, heliopolis) turned into wastelands
    2. The goats and camel of the arabs ruined the complex irrigation systems which romans maintained for centuries
    3. The arabs also got all their european slaves from the vikings which they were form eastern europe hence hte term slave is from slav, at this stage most slav’s were pagans
  3. The history books write that the crusades were attacks on a peaceful group out of nowhere, so you are telling me a group of pacifists unprovoked attacked 300 yeras ago, in a time when history is weak, weaker then today if you can imagine? And they still held resentment? I don’t know who my ancestor was 300 yeras ago, do you? They sure didnt

  1. What about astronomy and and evidence
    1. Gregorian calendar 1582, replace the old julian calendar but little lessa accurate 365.25 for julian but really 365.2422 so 13 days off over that time
    2. Council of Nicea must have known the julian calendar was wrong, but for some reason just went along w/ the equinox being on the 25th also setting precedent for priests/fathers to do teh same 300 yeras later
    3. Eclipses and such are reported w/ neros death, so if you look at the records according to NASa w/ illig chronologically it matches up perfectly w/ an eclipse in rome
    4. The Star of Bethlehem which guided the weisemen
      1. Which occurs 1719 years ago or in 295 AD but if you subtract the 297 you get the 2BC which would be right around the time
  2. What about carbon dating?!
    1. Well once its barely accurate and they just ignore the ones that don’t match
    2. Like if something looks roman they think 1st century, radiocarbon says 4th, they just think its a mistake. They use it to add credibility
    3. Its all about how mnuch carbon decays so the less carbon 14 it has, the older it is.
      1. This only works when conditions match, if it was in water, it would skew results
      2. But you can’t know if it was contaminated, theres no way to know
      3. Example someone buried his murdered wife in by a ground the body got wet, radiocarbon said body was 1500 yeras old.
    4. Tree ring dating also doesn’t work
      1. So basically its a huge thing, but it doesn’t work


I think Illig and this book provide awesome evidence about how we know very little of our true history.
I think this holds a lot of weight to be honest, the key point for me is the crusades. It makes literally zero sense the story we are told. Maybe to put the crusades in a bad light? I don’t know, but to think that pacifist christians would just leave them alone for 300 yeras and be backwater idiots for 300 yeras because they couldn’t get the imporots from the mediterannean makes zero sense. Humans are weak now, but back then they were survivors.

If you want to read the book go check it out, I actually have hte PDF if you want it, but Illig has lots of stuff I think on youtube and stuff. Definitely check it out.

I think thats it, im beat.
Last edited:


Well-Known Member
Trusted Member
Oct 12, 2020
Reaction score
When someone shows me evidence of the measure in use as in the year and how long it is and how they proved it and given me the opportunity to test it out for myself I will listen but for now it seems plain as the nose on my face that time is a man made construct used as a control mechanism though why there has to be control is anyone's guess.


Well-Known Member
Trusted Member
Sep 9, 2020
Reaction score
have been wishing for a good podcast to tackle this topic. thank you so much for posting!

Jef Demolder

Trusted Member
Sep 19, 2020
Reaction score
Heribert Illig, born in 1947, is one of the founding fathers of the German school of chronology criticism which started its activities in about 1990. Recently, Heribert stopped the publication of the review Zeitenspruenge and the update of his website In Western Europe, the phantom time theory was one of the first attempts to obtain a more clear view on invented history. The contribution of Illig was essential, but has been surpassed by subsequent research. Not only the history of the three centuries 600-900 has been invented, but the whole of ancient history until the renaissance. See for instance the publications of Uwe Topper and his website, which has also a section in English.


New member
Jun 5, 2021
Reaction score
In my opinion, the problem with Illig's version is that it relies on everything up to "614 AD", and everything from "911 AD" being properly documented.

Thus, the 297-year shift couldn't have passed unnoticed.

Chronological criticism would show that there was no chronology before a certain point, and everything prior to that point was dated by the same people at the same point in time.
Please respect our Posting Rules.

Users who are viewing this thread