It has been a long time since I looked into it, and sadly I can't find the other book where I got some additional details from. You may be correct that the authorship is well documented.
Until then I have edited the claims that are not supported by the listed book.
Christoph Reske (a respected researcher in this field), on whom I base the claims that are now left in the OP,
writes:
Those originals were kept for hundreds of years in the hands of the Nuremberg monastery - controlled by the corrupt church. This may be just a minor irrelevant detail.
Btw, it should be noted that the Chronicles mention 7 world ages of 1,000 years each in line with the old Christian calendars, which suggests that the new calendar system was forced on people at one point.
I don't claim that it did not exist at all, and the authors I quote also don't seem to believe that.
There were likely countless regional plagues throughout history. The problem is that the Plague of Justinian is raised to the "First Plague", comparing it to the Black Death.
The Welsh writings may be accurate, or not.
Regarding dates and timelines. There are several possibilities to change a timeline in retrospect, including just making up some centuries after changing the official calendar. The church made sure to make their calendar the default calendar and suppress competing native calendars, for example in China. This "work" included synchronizing calendars. And there is a lot of potential for manipulation, because this synchronization is complicated enough to hide whatever you want to hide.
A quick search shows that the Celts had their own calendar, so I wonder why they would go by the default Roman-Catholic calendar in their writings:
Celtic calendar - Wikipedia
- Koch, John T.
Celtic Culture: A Historical Encyclopedia.
The bishop visited Cornwall in around 700 to convince the king to adopt the Roman calendar (probably the Julian calendar, but maybe it's not that easy), and 1052 later it adopts the Gregorian one.
I doubt the only motivation for the Gregorian calendar was to make life easier for everyone. The 10-day discrepancy could have been an inevitable result of having to add some centuries.
The Gregorian calendar reform and the destruction of Irish culture likely involved rewriting of important historical documents, and adapting their culture to the Gregorian calendar. (
Ireland as an example of old-world governance)
Official history is pretty self-referential. There are always many possibilities. Maybe the world was connected by trade earlier than the controllers of history claim, thats also possible. Or the Scottish church of the Knights Templar also has a dating problem.
Yes, I think most of the events talk about in history happened one way or another. It was mostly the knowledge regarding those events that was subtly changed or censored. But some events were also completely made up, as Fomenko and other show, there are countless duplicates between anquitiy and the middle ages.
What it changes is that our history is shorter than claimed, and that for many events the context would be changed so much, that our history gets an entirely new meaning.
One idea that has been suggested is that 1,000 years got added by turning i500 into 1500, so just adding a one in front of the dates.
For example, if the Welsh writings indeed mention the year 540, and the dates are not manipulated, this would now correspondend to the year 1540 in our modern calendar. The event happened, but 500 years ago.
SH Archive - 1,000 Years of History Fabricated and added to our calendar. How was the deception pulled off?
The Gregorian reform was mainly used to add those 1,000 years, then many scholars were busy synchronizing all the events into the new calendar. There's a lot of potential for manipulation there. Now this could explain why there are two similar plagues divided by 1,000 years. The Justinian Plague mentioned in the Welsh writings could simply be part of the Black Death in the 16th Century.
The evil genius in this strategy is that you can basically duplicate history, and no one back then got suspicious, because for them the last 1,000 years did not change at all. It was only that now there was a foundation to change the entire concept of history for future generations.
Well, culture can change pretty quickly. Think about Europe in 1900. For me that's a different universe. If you bring together a 15-year old poisoned by smartphones, Instagram and Tik-Tok in a room with a 90-year old from the year 1850, they wouldn't even be able to communicate with each other beyond basic concepts.
Most young germans can't read books from 1700 at all. In 1850, some people were still able to recite entire books, connected to their ancestors and history. Some scholars believe that it takes only 3 generations for a language to die out and change completely.
I think that the chronology criticism has brought to light lots of evidence that shows that the official calendar does not correspondend to reality.
Wilhelm Kammeier has shown that the dates of the church documents before ca 1600 are all faked. We just have to debate the scope and the depth of this fakery.
He also says that there was no culture that focused on writing before 1600. People were simply not documenting things like we do today, and if they did, it wasn't usable in a standardized fashion. Everyone had their own system of documenting history, and especially the monarchs didn't to it at all. If there are cleanly written chronologies of the past, then this already suggests someone 100 or 200 years later sat down and combined several other documents into a more coherent one.
Personally I do think there was a written culture, but it got erased in the last cataclysm.
