A new manifesto to revise
prevailing history and chronology

An introduction to clarify historical criticism

by Christopher Pfister (CP)

*******************

See also: The Matrix of Ancient History

We usually assume that everything written and taught about our past - and the earth itself - is well researched and true.

By analyzing purported historical fact, we rapidly discover that this, however, is not the case. Thus we arrive at a juncture - it becomes necessary to clarify and constructively criticize prevailing history and chronology.

As the term indicates, criticism of history and chronology neatly divides into two distinct aspects: namely content and dating. Ancient history, in particular, but other historical narratives too, are problematic and riddled with falsehoods on both counts.

To put things another way - the indisputable, clear historical timeline ends up being considerably shorter than generally assumed.

Before setting out my arguments in this regard, I would first like to clarify a few epistemological points:

We have no crystal balls that allow us to glimpse the future; all we can hope to do is uncover a few trends and developments.

So, if it is impossible to see into the future, the same should logically go for the past. This is where we encounter an impasse. 

It is true that we do know something of the past, but at the same time we considerably overestimate our chances of acquiring comprehensive knowledge of the subject matter. We encounter a first limiting factor in our historical perception: the further back in time we go, the darker and more uncertain things become. In fact, the only point of certainty is the present. Knowledge of the past rapidly becomes problematic. In order to catalogue the past, we have to start from the present day.

Animals have no awareness of the past or future - they live purely in the present. Humans, on the other hand, are cultural beings and have developed mental representations of the past and the future.

Applying this principle further, we must conclude that the historical narrative is not representative of actual events but rather of desired historical perceptions.

So is it really true to say that our vision of the past is just as limited as our vision of the future?

This assertion is actually not quite correct. Apart from tools and skills, our culture has developed methods of recording past events beyond the span of a human lifetime. We have come up with devices to document events in word and image, and to chronicle these events within a fixed time frame.

But the time line representing those historical events that indisputably took place is much shorter than generally accepted. As we trace our way along the timeline further into the past, the content and chronology look questionable at first, then irrelevant, and finally absurd.

The task of historical analysis is to separate the wheat from the chaff, the real events and chronology from the false ones.

This dichotomy of false, invented and absurd events versus true events, however, is not absolute. We have to accept that there is a historical grey zone. True history fades first into dusk, then into total darkness, the dark ages.

Let us take a look at an example of what I mean. The English are said to have discovered Australia in 1770. It is a fact that English sailors discovered this continent. But the date is open to question. But dates at this time are not very reliable. At this time - 1770 - there were written records and the dates were given using four-digit Arabic numerals.

Imagine we wanted to give a record of the history of Australia before its discovery by the Europeans. It would be an impossible task. There are no written records with reliable datings. Of course, somebody could have asked the Aborigines, but their statements would have been contradictory and vague, only spanning a few generations. The same could be said for the history of Europe.

Reliable history needs reliable documents as a basis - and a great many of them at that! These days we think of information in terms of giga- and terabytes. But that quantity of information is unthinkable for ancient times.

And who even dares to attempt an accurate record of geological history, i.e. a time when humans and human culture did not exist?

Established history as presented in the majority of books and generally taught at schools and universities ignores these many problems and tends to give undue credence to a plethora of content and data apparently gleaned from the distant past, thus augmenting the collection of mere myths, sagas and legends, all uncritically accepted as truth.

So what could be true?

The Napoleonic wars at the beginning of the 19th century were probably real enough.

The French Revolution from 1788/89 might just be the first historical narrative that is credible.

But any historical events before this time are impossible to confirm.

Any attempt to set up and describe a year such as 1700 in historical terms is absurd.

The Thirty Years’ War in a so-called 17^th century has nothing to do with history.

The Hundred Years’ War between England and France in the late Middle Ages barely contains a grain of truth.

The wars in Ancient History such as the Greco-Persian Wars or the Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage are stories and not histories.

The colonization of the New World by Europeans began at some point but entities such as “Columbus” or marker years such as ‘1492’ are pure nonsense.

At the inception of modern history, ‘at the start of the sixteenth century’, we read about the Protestant Reformation. The corresponding documents, however, can not have been created until about 1750. The Reformation itself remains enigmatic despite the abundance of records.

The brief of historical and chronological revisionism is to untangle the network formed by misguided scholarship, cut through the hubris and prune historical data in such a way that we are left with a truly sound basis.

The logical result of this enterprise is a shortening of the chronological time line. Human history and the geological record are considerably shorter than generally assumed.

History in the true sense of the word can only have begun at the time when historical records were written down. Contemporaneous written records denote the threshold of the historical era.

Records made of alleged previous events including dating are part of an enormous historical forgery project.

Several authors have recognized this and speak of a large-scale initiative to invent and falsify history.

The creation of historical forgeries and fabrications has always gone hand in hand.

Before the beginning of the 19^th century nobody was interested in writing true history.

In my opinion the alphabet, as well as the first written records first appeared roughly three hundred years ago.

Before that time onwards records in stone, clay and metal are plausible, however, it was still too early for historical records as such.

I date the inception of written record-taking on paper and parchment, as well as the collection of documents whether hand-written or printed to 1740 and onwards. It is permissible to use this date in this way because our current Anno Domini calendar (i.e. counting the years from the birth of Christ onwards) developed in parallel to the creation of written records. It is indeed interesting to ponder the question of how the use of AD (Anno Domini = the year of our Lord/after Christ) and BC (Before Christ) implies that it is possible to demarcate a single event so exactly, even though it was supposed to have happened in the very distant past.

Our present era counting (B.C and A.D.) is probably the work of the French Jesuit Denis Pétau, his Latin name, Dionysius Petavius, the medieval form, Dionysius Exiguus. This scholar was the first to meld the whole of history into a chronological system replete with epochs and numbered calendar years.

Fomenko considers the scholar Joseph Justus Scaliger to be the creator of our present chronology and historical narrative. This was the first scholar to calculate the exact birth date of Jesus Christ. Thanks to him we also know that Emperor Augustus died “on August 19, in the year 14AD, in the afternoon between two and three o’clock in Nola near Naples”.

The years recounted before the inception of sound history have a mere numerological significance and should therefore always be written within inverted commas.

Before the middle of the 18^th century hardly anything written down has survived except for a few inscriptions on stone or metal and these are by no means sufficient to reconstruct any kind of reliable history.

Some may object that since the second half of the 20th century we may dispose of scientific dating methods, such as C 14 etc. But all these tools show to be an enormous nonsense. There is no way to dating by physical or nuclear methods.

Many researchers know that written sources in our archives and libraries do not go back very far but instead of admitting this they lay great store by allegedly ancient inscriptions on stone, clay and papyrus from the Ancient Orient.

But even Egyptian hieroglyphs and Babylonian cuneiform writing do not go back beyond our threshold which designates the first stirrings of literacy in Central Europe. The Ancient Orient is largely a fabrication of the European West.

Before the decade following 1780 we cannot determine any date for certain and therefore we cannot validate any written document as being historically accurate. The historian can only make assumptions about this period and of course the further back in time we wish to go, the more speculative such assumptions become. I personally would hesitate to make any assumptions pertaining to the period 350 to 400 years before the present day.

The logical conclusion has to be that human culture probably began about four hundred years ago.

The historical difficulties pertain to the period further back than two hundred years ago, that is before 1815.

Historical criticism is basically as old as the age of written history.

I would like to mention and acknowledge a few earlier historical critics.

The French priest Jean Hardouin rejected the authenticity of all old texts, especially the Bible, the writings of the church fathers as well as Greek and Roman classics. He also declared that official documents, church council records and ancient coins were fabrications from a later period.

The Dutch Jesuit Papebroch maintained that all official documents were inauthentic.

Voltaire is to be seen as one of the first great historical critics. In his writings he railed against the absurdity of many details regarding ancient and medieval history.

Two hundred years ago a work called ‘My View on History’ written by one Peter Franz Joseph Müller was published. In it the author lays out the case for the works of many classical authors as well as early written documents being produced at a much later period than general acknowledges.

In the 1890’s the English religious scholar and historian Edward Johnson was the first author to speak of a large-scale project to fabricate history. He pointed the finger at numerous forgery centers in Europe - mainly monastery-based - and he dated the start of this project to the beginning of the 16^th century.

At the turn of the twentieth century the unknown, but brillant ancient philologist Robert Baldauf published two brochures analyzing Greek and Roman literature. He argued that these ‘classic works’ showed an interdependence on German and Romanesque languages and must therefore have been created within just a generation.

In the 1930’s the German historian Wilhelm Kammeier indicated that there had been a comprehensive fabrication of history including official documents and sources that dated back to the late medieval era.

Kammeier also recognized the deliberate contradictions that historical fabrication produced. The forgers wanted to prevent people having absolute certainty by not giving them any one reliable source to fall back on.

At the beginning of the twentieth century the Russian philosopher Nikolai Morosow was the first to include not only historical content but also the alleged time periods in his criticism. He attempted to shorten the chronology of human history in a radical way.

Since the beginning of the 1990’s the Russian mathematician Anatoly Fomenko determined by analysis and comparison of old texts, the Bible and ancient literature that these various stories could be reduced to a few templates, the myth of the Trojan war being fundamental.

Fomenko also discovered through analysis of parallelisms and isomorphic patterns in the historical narratives and chronologies that the epochs of ancient and medieval history including the corresponding rulers repeated themselves and slotted together very nicely indicating that repetitions were taking place.

Employing the method of name analysis (proper and place names), I (CP) have extended Fomenko’s research, developed my own line of enquiry especially regarding old Swiss history and have published the results in my book “Die Matrix der alten Geschichte “ (The Matrix of Ancient History) and others. Different from Fomenko I propose rough dates for the development of modern history and culture, as well as clearly later dates for the beginning of the fabrication of history and the inception of true history.

History begins with written records and by analyzing them and comparing the contents we can determine a level of plausibility for each document.

The old year numbers in the calendar offer us clues to the creation of the documents. Before the start of hand-written and printed records there are no chronological designations and periods.

However the analysis of written records is not the only tool that can be used for this purpose; architecture and technical innovations offer us great clues while revising our view of chronology and human cultural history, as they give us a rich visual view of the sequence of various epochs, which allows us to estimate its dating even in the absence of written records.

One particular technical innovation must be pointed out, namely cement or mortar. This binding material first made it possible to erect stable walls and tall buildings. The so-called Roman era has its roots in this new building method enabled through cement or mortar. Before this period all buildings were made of vegetable matter such as wood, reeds, straw and mud or earth. The oldest, documented buildings are the so called pile dwellings.

Another candidate for the oldest dwellings are the hill mounds or burial mounds as well as the so called hill forts which are defensive structures pre-dating stone forts and castles comprising a central elevated plane surrounded by walls and ditches Stone fortresses - that is defensive structures containing towers, gates and circular walls were generally constructed on the sites of old hill forts. The transition between these two different structures took place approximately within decades, not centuries.

„Ancient“ temples, that is sacred buildings comprising a cella enclosed by a stone wall with arches or columns are older than churches.

Churches from the modern period - that is from the middle of the 18^th century - were often built directly above the remains of Roman facility buildings (villae rusticae). This proves that the transition between both building styles - ancient and medieval - must have been very rapid.

It is surprising that the remains of Roman buildings north of the Alps are to be found under fertile soil, meadows, fields and woods. Building material from the ruins was obviously carried off within a few years to be recycled in the construction of new buildings.

The hill mounds or burial mounds were all plundered, most of them in the 19th century but many at an even earlier period. The conclusion that must be drawn is that the cultures that built these hill mounds cannot have lived as long ago as archaeologists maintain.

The wooden stumps on the lakesides in Switzerland and Southern Germany cannot be more than a few centuries old at the most, as wood decays naturally.

Earthworks such as hill forts and burial mounds are susceptible to earth movements and would be much less distinctive in the landscape after a period of several centuries; in fact, they are clearly visible today.

The afore-mentioned „Roman“ building culture around the Mediterranean has left many impressive remains. The imposing monuments make it hard for us to realize how little we know about the culture that built them. We cannot say with any degree of certainty where they came from, how long they prevailed or how they ended .The only thing that can be said for sure is that the Roman buildings were carried off within a few years during the “Middle Ages”.

But after a generation or two - actually perhaps towards the middle of the 18^th century - a wave of nostalgia called the Renaissance set in, geared towards classical antiquity, and so many buildings were built later in this particular classical style.

The Parthenon on the Acropolis of Athens is viewed as the epitome of ancient Greek classicism. However it was actually a Christian cathedral built in classical style and consecrated to the Virgin Mary. The instigators of this building were Franks, Catalonians or Italians. Classical Greece was not created by the mythical Ancient Greeks but by western crusaders.

We encounter a similar set of circumstances in Rome; Trajan’s and Marcus Aurelius’ columns, the Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius and the Pantheon are to be considered post-classical buildings.

Piranesi’s picturesque depictions of ruins and Montesquieu and Gibbon’s ponderings on the fall of the Roman Empire provide evidence of a modern culture attempting to create a specific way of depicting “ancient” history.

As soon as Classical Antiquity once again became accepted as a role model, architecture and artistic objects were imitated or fabricated.

Roman coins with their realistic and evocative depictions of emperors heralded the art of the Renaissance. The history books tell us that in Italy “in the first half of the 15th century” - in reality it was the middle of the 18th century - a certain Cyriacus of Ancona found ancient art treasures and inscriptions everywhere in Greece. Actually he was the person who manufactured these antiques and even traded with them.

Cyriacus von Ancona was the first to give us a visual impression of the Parthenon.

The Baroque and Neo-classic periods starting from the last third of the 18^th century cannot be explained without the dominating influence of the classic role models.

We admire the rounded colonnades in front of St Peter’s cathedral in Rome - possibly built about 1790. Its precursor can be found in present-day Jordan, namely the colonnades of the round market place of Gerasa.

At the foot of Vesuvius near Naples there is a town that was destroyed by a violent eruption. But on close inspection the famous town of Pompeii seems very medieval. It wasn’t until the excavations since the second half of the 18th century that this ruined city was stylized into a “classical ancient” site.

Before the end of the 18^th century cultural and architectural change was more rapid than today, unhampered by lumbering bureaucratic procedures.

The buildings of Rome are proof of these quick transitions. The first illustrations of Rome in the chronicles of Hartmann Schedel and Sebastian Münster show a medieval town with a few antique buildings - as the Column of Marcus Aurelius and the Trajan's Column, as well as the Colosseum and the Pantheon.

The Dutch artist Maarten van Heemskerck captured Rome shortly before its baroque transformation. Saint Peter’s cathedral is being constructed, yet without its later changes. These illustrations can be dated to 1760. Work on this afore-mentioned central church of Christianity therefore probably started in about 1760, however, the buildings and structures we know today were probably not completed until about the begin of the French Revolution.

And not until the second half of the 18th century one can be assured the the popes resided in Rome.

Art history provides us with as strong arguments as with architecture and so buttress our historical and chronological critique.

Fundamentally all paintings on wood, canvas or paper can be dated to the start of literacy.

Albrecht Dürer (please note his initials - AD!) cannot not have been active until the year number he wrote below his compositions was familiar and in general use.

Dürer drew modern fortifications with bastions which weren’t developed until the 1760’s.

All other artists cannot be older. The so-called Golden Age of Flemish and Dutch art was around 1770 - not a century earlier. And all artists who we consider up to 500 years old be it Botticelli, Michelangelo or Raffael - paint landscapes and towns that we can partially recognize today.

The argument for architecture also applies for the artistic techniques. The various pigments first had to be invented, as well as the paper and canvas. Such art works don’t last for centuries, and must thus be younger than conventionally assumed.

Painting and sculptures played a large part in the fabrication of history. Fomenko noted that the famous Augustus statue of Prima Porta near Rome that was found in 1863, fully depends on the Scaliger-Chronology to fit into the hereupon erected historical edifice.

Literary fraud and historical forgeries and fabrications are closely tied to the invention of the alphabet and writing.

Scientists forget that before a language can be recorded a generally binding alphabet has to be in place.

First of all sacred and trade languages were invented. Oral national languages followed suit. The sequence of the classical sacred languages was as follows; Greek, Latin and finally Hebrew. These languages developed in different localities to those proposed by conventional philologists or ancient language scholars.

The source of Greek is unknown, possibly Syria or Egypt.

Latin seems to have been created in Gaul.

Hebrew must have been created in South-West Germany or Helvetia at about the same time as German.

Literacy and writing in the form of hand-written or printed documents didn’t begin until towards the middle of the 18^th century.

The documents that were filed and stored in libraries required further cultural achievements.

At the start of the process practical materials to write on had to be manufactured, such as parchment, papyrus and especially paper.

Without ink it isn’t possible to handwrite or print books.

Literature and literary fabrications came into being with the advent of writing. Simultanously with the invention of history, our current calendar system with the four Arabic numerals was being invented. This is the only extant method of marking the year and it cannot have existed before written records.

The written history from the very beginning  to the end of the 18th century - is symbolic history, the year numbers are symbolic numbers.

All material pre-dating this period - the whole corpus of “ancient” and ”medieval” documents, the works of the Classical authors, the Bible, the writings of the Church Fathers, the various chronicles, the fiction of a thousand-year Byzantine Empire - all of it originated in the west, primarily in Italy and France.

The writings of the Byzantine Church Father BASILIUS of Caesarea for instance, has been printed in BASEL - were they probably were written in the first place.

And these allegedly ancient tales must have been created in a very short time, maybe within a generation. The afore-mentioned Robert Baldauf realized this too. For example, there are a lot of parallelisms between the Old and New Testaments that show that the Bible was written in a very brief period and, in fact, that there is no justification for calling one part “old” and the other part “new”.

The fabrication of history and the literary narratives was motivated by several factors.

The regress of civilization due to the decline of the „Roman period”, wasn't for long. The modern times - wrongly known as "Middle Ages" - developed a new culture in the west, together with a succession of revolutionary technical innovations such as deep-sea navigation, the mirror, book printing and gunpowder.

The new era had no past that was set in stone as far as content and calendar were concerned, and so the large-scale project of historical fabrication was initiated to fill this vacuum. The purpose of this project was indeed to equip the newly wrought culture with a suitably long past.

In this way, contemporaneous events were post-dated to earlier times and contexts.

The desire of the newly hatched western culture to give itself a long and venerable past characterized the style of literary production; various handwriting styles were developed in order to create the illusion that these had existed before book printing. But most of the handwritings were copied from printed books.

The placement of handwriting on parchment was supposed to indicate that said writing material was older than paper. Biblical manuscripts were preferentially written on papyrus leading to our mistaken current belief that this was the oldest writing material.

Even supposedly old variations of newly developed languages were created; Middle High German, Old High German, Old French, and Old Italian. The pinnacle of this language invention process was the deliberate creation of “ancient” languages.

In Germany Gothic was invented and a few fragments of the Old Testament were recorded in this new language.

In France Homeric Greek was created with the back-story that this idiom had developed “in the first millennium BC” in Asia Minor. But the figure that we can glimpse in the shadows behind Homer is the Comte de Saint Omer, a Frankish minstrel who wrote poetry in medieval Greece.

Place names such as Attica and Athens that are allegedly of Ancient Greek origin are actually Romanesque. Bosporus is a French word. Similarly, the “Dardenelles” and “Byzantine” are names rooted in French geography.

Names that are seen as of Ancient Egyptian origin such as Ramses, Cheops, Luxor, Gaza and Pelusium also have French roots.

This venture to create old languages that had never existed before expanded towards the east.

In the second half of the 18th century Old Persian was developed. As for Ancient Sanskrit (Sanctum scriptum = holy writing), it must have been invented by Serbian or Bulgarian missionaries in India in the late 18^th century.

In similar manner English missionaries in the second half of the 18^th century influenced Native American words and designations in North America. The Hurons, the Iowa and the Hawaiian word “Aloha” are all designations of Hebrew origin.

The process of post-dating history is a first and important clue in historical and chronological criticism. We would be interested in the events that actually happened in the time the records were made, namely the 18th century, but instead we are treated to a fabricated collection of tales about a mythical Middle Ages and an even more distant Ancient Classical period.

Despite their diligence, the historical fabricators, however, did not manage to fill in all the gaps evenly; lacunae tended to appear. The “Middle Ages” from the end of the “Late Classical Period” to the “Late Middle Ages” cover a span of some thousand years of idleness in which time didn’t run forwards but even backwards. Or can someone give a credible reason why people in Western Europe only read the Bible, the Church Fathers writings and a few Ancient Classics for a thousand years?

Ancient History is a kind of historical and chronological nirvana, occasional lit up by a few outstanding epochs, personalities and events. There is a gap of more than five hundred years between the so-called Cretan or Mycenaean Greece and Classical Greece.

The era of Charlemagne offers another bright oasis in the darkness of the “Early Middle Ages”

Classical Athens didn’t know her own greatest philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, because they were invented at a later date.

There is also a sizeable gap of about several hundred years between Classic Ancient Greece and Classic Ancient Rome which is inadequately described by the term Hellenism.

Due to the fact that everything was created in reverse chronological order, there are even gaps in the 17^th and 18^th centuries; it wasn’t until later that this period was filled with content detail.

By analyzing the sequence of certain technical innovations, but especially of building styles and architecture, we may be able to determine a cultural sequence in terms of content and dating for a time period that lies more than three hundred years ago. It might be thus possible to determine some historical events from 1780 onwards.

In 1783 the Peace Treaty between an independent North America and England and France was signed in Versailles. The United States must therefore have been founded shortly before.

At about this time, the grand Palace of Versailles was being built. The ruinous financial consequences of this building project were said to have led to the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1788/89.

The revolutionary events in Europe made the continuation of the consensual, decades-long historical fabrication project unfeasible. This break with the conventions that had been put in place eventually led to the development of historical records that paralleled each other in terms of content and chronology.

But certain dates, persons and events between 1789 and 1815 are still questionable.

Even the figure of Napoleon Bonaparte can be viewed skeptically. Why did Napoleon undertake such a long and incomprehensible military expedition to Egypt in the middle of the war in 1798? And why are there records of Napoleon on the remote island of St. Helen’s?

The growing interconnectedness of the narratives made it difficult to create credible literal fabrications from 1815 onwards. On the other hand, the supposed Old High German texts published by Johann Andreas Schmeller and the Codex Sinaïticus of the Bible published by Konstantin von Tischendorf prove that this was still possible.

For the last 150 years or so only a few fabricated documents and art objects have been made.

The Pergamon altar erected in Berlin after 1871, the gold bust of Marc Aurel of Avenches (Switzerland) discovered in 1939, the statue of a Celtic Prince in Glauberg, discovered 1996 in Glauberg (Hesse) prove that the fabrication process is still proceeding undauntedly. Our society demands antiques and so its antiques they’ll get!

In Greece “ancient” buildings are still being built today to attract tourists.

The famous Dead Sea Scrolls of Qumran contain the whole Hebrew testament. It is no coincidence that the discovery of these papyrus and parchment documents was made in 1948 - the year of the founding of Israel.

Fabricated history can be detected by paying attention to certain details.

In the first place pseudo-historical narratives feature absurd and grotesque characters. The critical reader, paying attention to his or her gut feeling, soon realizes that something is off.

Louis XIV of France is supposed to have built the magnificent Palace of Versailles. The costs for this building apparently served to trigger the French Revolution. But a period of eighty years lies between the completion of Versailles and the outbreak of the French revolution.

The Crusades in the Middle Ages “from about 1100 AD” are supposed to be the consequence of the occupation of Christian Jerusalem by the Persians and later the Arabs “in about 640AD”. Why did Western Europe hold on to its indignation for about 350 years before deciding on a military intervention?

There are other details too that enable us to detect the invented histories; old historical narratives have been woven according to a certain pattern, a blueprint, a matrix. Consequently the events must repeat themselves. By analyzing the material carefully, certain parallel contents come to light. Fomenko and I, myself, have delved thoroughly into historical stereotypes and isomorphic patterns.

Fundamentally all of Ancient History is based upon the Myth of Troy and the Trojan wars.

The repetition of identical content is also evident.

Rome’s worst enemy was Carthage. Their military forces occupied the whole of the western Mediterranean and the coasts of southern Europe. But in the Modern Period the Saracens from Tunisia - the location of ancient Carthage - were the enemy faction on the Mediterranean coast of Spain, France and Italy.

The place names “Carthage” and “Corinth” prove, on closer analysis, to have identical etymologies. So the history fabricators make the Romans destroy both cities in the same year, although these places are located in completely different countries.

In ancient times, the Sea Peoples are supposed to have invaded the eastern Mediterranean. In the High Middle Ages crusaders from Western Europe are said to have done battle in the Levant.

The Sea Peoples did not manage to conquer Egypt. Similarly, the western crusaders were soundly defeated in the Nile Delta.

During the so-called Migration of Peoples the Burgundians were destroyed by the Huns in the area around Worms. Despite this “destruction”, a new Burgundian empire flourished in the High Middle Ages. What is more, a new Duchy of Burgundy, located between France and Germany, arose from the proverbial ashes in the late Middle Ages only to go on to be “completely and suddenly destroyed” by said nations.

Nearly every Roman Emperor had to do battle with Parthians or Persians in the east. Each time, however, the enemies recovered their strength - in the late Roman period, for instance, they even managed to capture the Emperor Valerian.

There were Persians in the Middle Ages and the Modern Period too. They prevailed undefeated for centuries.

The many parallels in fabricated history are apparent to anyone who takes the trouble to look. The astonishing thing is that most historians manage to either ignore or trivialize such “coincidences”.

Earlier researchers did manage to ascertain parallels, at least in part. In the late 19^th century the great historian Ferdinand Gregorovius noted many puzzling similarities in two of his works on the medieval history of Rome and that of Athens between the Classical Age and the Middle Ages.

These parallels provide the royal road to proving the fictitious nature of what is presented to us as historical fact. Fomenko and I have identified the most important parallels and have presented them in the form of tables.

I provide an example of one such table below for the reader’s scrutiny.

Selected examples of historic parallels

Genesis: Cain kills his brother Abel.	Rome at the beginning of the monarchy: Romulus kills his brother Remus.
Genesis: A falling-out between Abraham (Father of Rome) and LOT (= LT = LATINA). The latter moves eastwards.	Late Rome: A Falling-out between Constantine the Great and LICINIUS (= LC > LT = LATINA). The latter moves eastwards.
Genesis: A fire destroys the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah	Rome at the time of the kings: The Vesuvius erupts and destroys the town of Alba or Naples (= Pompeii). A fire destroys Rome at the same time.
Genesis: Abraham intends to sacrifice his son Isaac on an altar.	The voyage of the Argonauts: Agamemnon intends to sacrifice his daughter Iphigenia on an altar.
Exodus: Departure of the Jews from Egypt to Mt. Sinai (= Vesuvius)	Roman Republic: Departure of the Plebeians to the Holy Mountain (= Vesuvius)
Exodus: Departure of the Jews from Egypt via the Red Sea to Galilee (Gaul).	Julius Caesar: Departure of the Helvetians via the Red River (= Rotten, Rhone) to Gaul.
Troy has seven kings.	Rome has seven kings.
Ruth: Rape of the daughters of Siloh (SILO = S(C)L=SICILIA)	Titus Livius: Rape of the Sabine women
“Around 1200 BC“ Troy is conquered by the Greeks = Franks.	„1202 – 1204“: Constantinople is conquered by the Franks = Greeks.
End of the Roman Monarchy: Junius Brutus frees Rome from tyranny	End of the Roman republic: BRUTUS frees Rome from the tyranny of Julius Caesar
The Babylonians = Gauls conquer Jerusalem in „587 AD“.	The Gauls conquer Rome in 387 AD.
The Assyrian King Pul lays siege to Jerusalem but has to flee because of a plague.	Emperor Frederick Barbarossa lays siege to Rome but has to flee because of a plague.
REZIN, the King of Syria attacks in vain Jerusalem, the capital of the kingdom of Judah, together with Remalja, the King of Israel (2. Kings 16).	Illa, a confidante of the late Roman General RICIMER lays siege, in vain, to Byzantium (Constantinople).
SAUL orders the death of the High Priests of the Holy Sanctuary of Nob.	SULLA orders the death of the High Priests of the Holy Sanctuary of Praeneste.
Sulla destroys Praeneste in „82 BC“	Pope Boniface VIII destroys Palestrina, the ancient Praeneste, in „1298 AD“
SAUL voluntarily gives up his throne and kingdom (or monarchy?).	SULLA voluntarily gives up his throne and kingdom.
The Athenian ruler SOLON voluntarily resigns after completing his tasks.	SULLA voluntarily resigns after completing his tasks.
SULLA voluntarily resigns after completing his tasks.	Emperor Diocletian voluntarily resigns after completing his tasks. His retirement residence is SALONA.
Tanaquil = TRANQUILLA, the wife of the Roman King Tarquinius Priscus was of noble blood and very domineering.	Galla Placidia, the mother of the late Roman Emperor Valentinian III. was of noble blood and very domineering.
Julius Caesar has an affair with Cleopatra, a Queen from the east.	Emperor Aurelius kidnaps Zenobia, a Queen from the east and takes her to Rome.
Julius Caesar sails across the Adriatic = the Sea of Gaul to DALMATIA.	Jesus Christ sails across the Sea of Galilee to DALMANUTA (The Gospel of Mark).
Julius Caesar is wounded and killed by stabbing.	Jesus Christ is wounded and killed by stabbing.
Julius Caesar is wounded and killed by stabbing.	Emperor Aurelius is wounded and killed by stabbing.
Julius Caesar is wounded and killed by stabbing.	Emperor Julian is wounded and killed by stabbing.
Jesus cleans the temple in Jerusalem of money lenders.	Hildebrand = Pope Gregory VII. cleans the Roman Catholic Church of simony.
Julius Caesar has a rival in Pompey the Great. He is decapitated.	Jesus Christ has a rival in John the Baptist. He is decapitated.
JOSHUA (= JOU/AN) conquers the Holy Land CANAAN = Campania.	Charles of ANJOU conquers the Holy Land CANAAN = Campania.
Joshua conquers Jericho, during which trumpets play a role.	Alexander the Great conquers Tyrus, during which trumpets play a role.
Solomon’s Kingdom of Israel comprises 12 tribes.	Constantine the Great divides the Roman Empire into 12 dioceses. The Helvetians have 12 towns (oppida).
The Assyrian King PHUL > TUL (TL) destroys Israel.	The King of the Huns ATTILA (TL) destroys the Roman Empire.
In Israel and Judah the tyrant Jehu = JAHWE = God of the prophets had Elijah at his side.	In the late Roman Empire the tyrant Alaric (ALA = God) had the Church Father John Chrysostomus at his side.
Jehu destroys both Judah (= Eastern Rome) and Israel (= Western Rome) and rules over both Kingdoms.	Alaric destroys Eastern Rome and Western Rome and rules over both Kingdoms.
Jotam of Judah (reign duration period: 16 years) fights against the Ammonites.	Emperor Domitian (reign duration period: 16 years) fights against the Dacians (= Thracians)
The Jews are led out of Jerusalem and spend seventy years in Babylonian captivity.	The Popes are led out of Rome and spend seventy years in Avignon = Babylonian captivity.
There was a hanging garden in BABYLON (PPL = papalis = papal) or NINIVE (= NNV > VNN = AVENNO = Avignon).	There is a garden on top of a cliff = a hanging garden in the pope’s city of Avignon (AVENNO = VNN > NNV = NINIVE).
Ezra: After returning home from Babylonian =Persian = Franconian captivity, the Jews organize a great faith-based assembly (= Council) in Jerusalem.	After the end of Babylonian = Persian = Franconian captivity of the Church whose dignitaries organize a Council in Constance (earlier in PISA = PERSIA)
At the beginning of his reign Alexander the Great destroys THEBES, a city within his domain.	At the beginning of his reign, Charles the Bold of Burgundy, destroys DINANT, a city within his domain.
Alaric, member of a Germanic people, is buried in the River Busento.	Frederick Barbarossa, a German, drowns in the Saleph River.
King Manasseh of Judah instigates a bloodbath in Jerusalem.	The Byzantine Emperor Justinian instigates a blood bath in Constantinople during the Nika riot.
Jesus has MARIA MAGDALENE as a noble benefactress.	Hildebrand = Pope Gregory VII. has MATILDA of Tuscany as a noble benefactress.
Solomon has a royal friend from SHEBA.	Frederick II. of Hohenstaufen has a wife ISABELLA from England.
Hadrian has a beloved young friend named ANTINOUS.	Frederick II. of Hohenstaufen’s favourite son is named ENZIO.
Moses invokes a law of the ten tables	The Roman Republic invokes a law of the ten tables
At the Council of Nicea the teachings of ARIUS are damned.	At the Council of Constance the teachings of JOHN HUS are damned.
JULIUS Caesar conquers the Germanic tribes in Alsace.	Emperor JULIAN conquers the Alemanni at Strasbourg in Alsace.
Julius Caesar is a Sun King. His mother’s name is AURELIA.	The Roman Emperor AURELIUS makes the SUN CULT into the official religion.
Emperor Caligula had to wear soldiers' boots when he was a young man.	Emperor Julian the Apostate had to wear soldiers' boots when he was a young man.
The tyrannical Emperor Nero (time of reign duration: 14 years) in the Western Roman Empire had Seneca as a co-regent. Nero was part of a Triumvirate together with Seneca and Burrus.	The tyrannical Emperor Valens (time of reign duration: 14 years) in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire) had Gratian as a co-regent. Valens was part of a Triumvirate together with Valentinian I and Gratian.
Nero (NERONEM) has his wife Octavia executed because of alleged adultery.	Otto III. (OTTONEM) has his wife, the daughter of a King of Aragon, burnt at the stake because of alleged adultery
Herodes (HERODEM) has JOHN the Baptist decapitated. Nero (NERONEM) has the Apostle Paul decapitated.	Otto III. (OTTONEM) has JOHANNES Crescentius decapitated
Spartacus and his supporters are crucified outside of Rome.	Jesus of Nazareth and his supporters are crucified outside of Jerusalem.
The general of the eastern Roman Emperor (Byzantine) Justinian orders Carthage to be conquered: “535 AD”.	The general of the Roman Emperor Charles V orders Tunis (Carthage) to be conquered: „1535 AD“ = 1000 after Justinian.
The king of the Ostrogoths Theoderic the Great in Italy becomes distrustful towards the end of his life and has the philosopher BOETHIUS executed.	The German Emperor Frederich II of the House of Hohenstaufen in Italy becomes distrustful towards the end of his life and has his chancellor PIETRO della  Vigna executed.
Antiquity: The seafaring nation of the PHOENICIANS.	Modern times: The seafaring nation of VENICE.
The ancient military state of SPARTA (S.PTRM = sanctum patrem = holy father (Pope) is located on the Peloponnes.	The medieval Despotate of Mistra (MISTER = Lord, Master) is located on the Peloponnes.
The Peloponnesian War in Greece ends with an amphibian operation by the Athenians against Sicily.	The Gothic War in Italy begins with an amphibian operation of the Byzantine Empire against Sicily.
After the Peloponnesian War the defeated city of Athens is ruled by 30 tyrants.	After the capitulation and capture of emperor Valerian the Roman Empire is ruled by 30 tyrants.
POMPEY the Great is decapitated after defeat in battle.	The last Gothic King TEJAS = POMPEY is decapitated on the battlefield.
The joint reign duration of Pompey the Great and Julius Caesar lasts 11 years.	The joint reign duration of Diocletian and Constantius Chlorus lasts 11 years.
The Roman general (M)ARIUS dies because of blood loss.	The heretic ruler ARIUS dies because of blood loss.
In the Severan dynasty there is fraternal strife between Caracalla and Geta. The latter is killed.	In the Habsburg dynasty there is fraternal strife between Johann Parricida and Albrecht. The latter is killed.
Septimius Severus, founder of a dynasty, rules for 18 years.	Rudolf I of the House of Habsburg rules for 18 years.
Septimius Severus conquers BYZANTIUM at the beginning of his rule.	Rudolf of the House of Habsburg conquers BESANÇON = BYZANTIUM at the end of his rule.
The Roman army under the command of Crassus suffers a devastating defeat to the Parthians at Carrhae in Syria in 53BC.	The Roman army under the command of Emperor Valens suffers a devastating defeat to the Goths at Adrianopole in 378 AD.
Constantine the Great (reign duration period: 31 years) occupies Constantinople (New Rome) in 330 AD.	The Byzantine Emperor Heraclitus (reign duration period: 31 years) occupies Jerusalem (divine Rome) in 630 AD.
Constantine the Great builds New Rome = Constantinople and so founds the Byzantine Empire.	Constantine XI (Palaiologos) loses Constantinople in 1453, thus ending the Byzantine Empire.
Romulus Quirinus, the first Roman king, is taken up to heaven upon his death.	Constantine the Great, the first late-Roman Emperor is taken up to heaven upon his death.
Church Father Augustine, a reformer of the faith, writes a treatise (series of homilies?) Adversus Judaeos = Against the Jews/Judeans.	The Protestant Reformer Martin Luther, an Augustine, writes a sermon: Against the Jews and a treatise: On Jews and Their Lies.
The „ancient“ writer PLUTARCH. The name is identical to the late medieval PETRARCA. Plutarch writes biographies of famous men.	The Renaissance writer PETRARCA. The name is identical to the “ancient” PLUTARCH. Petrarca writes biographies of famous men.
The spiritual founder of the eastern Greek church St. BASIL the Great of Caesarea.	The writings of St. Basil the Great are edited in the west, in BASEL.
Julius Caesar the Pontifex Maximus = Pope in Rome is murdered in „44 BC“.	Peter becomes the first Roman pope = Pontifex Maximus in “44 AC”
The Macedonian King Philip lays siege to and finally conquers the Byzantine Empire = Constantinople in “340/339 BC”. The Macedonians (Mohammedans) come from Thrace (TRC).	The Ottoman King Mohammed II lays siege to and finally conquers Constantinople = Byzantine Empire in „1453“. The Ottomans or Turks (TRC) come from Thrace.
The western Roman Emperor Valentinian III pays a tribute to Attila, the King of the Huns to prevent him from attacking Rome.	Menahem, the King of Israel = Western Roman Empire pays a tribute to the Assyrian King Phul or Tul to prevent him from attacking Samaria (= Sancta Maria).
The Theban forces win a great victory over the Spartans in „371“ BC thanks to a so-called irregular battle array. Locality of the battle: LEUCTRA	Frederick the Great wins a great victory over the enemy coalitions thanks to a so-called irregular battle array. Locality of the battle: LEUTHEN
The Romans suffer a devastating defeat in „214 BC“ against Carthage. The enemy fails, however, to exploit this victory. Locality of the battle: CANNAE = CANAAN	Frederic the Great suffers a devastating defeat in „1759“. His enemies, however, fail to exploit the victory. Locality of the battle: CUNNERS-Dorf

The times and dates given for the fabricated events prove to be just as ridiculous as the contents themselves. Historical chronology has nothing to do with real epochs; it is a grotesque system of representing times and dates. We can uncover many doublings, transpositions and repetitive year numbers.

“Around 400 AD”, for instance, St. Jerome is said to have translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin in Bethlehem. Worryingly, we have to wait until the 16th century, namely 1100 years later, to see the Latin Vulgate selected as the official foundation of the Catholic Faith at the Council of Trent.

Similarly, 1100 years after St. Jerome’s efforts in Bethlehem, Martin Luther translated the Latin Bible into German. Did Hieronymus and Luther merely translate the Bible or did they actually write it themselves? And, furthermore, are the figures of Jerome and Luther one in the same?

It is said that “around 450 BC” Athens with its magnificent marble structures as basking in all its Classical glory under the reign duration of Pericles. Five hundred years later it was Rome’s turn to have a Classical Age, complete with famous marble monuments. How can this incredible temporal transition be explained in view of the fact that Greece and Italy are separated by the Strait of Otranto in the Adriatic?

The towering Temple of Olympian Zeus in Athens has Corinthian capitals crowning the columns, and construction work is supposed to start on it “in the 6th century BC”. However, work on it was not completed until five hundred years later by Emperor Hadrian. Absurdly, for a construction work of that age, nearly two thousand years later there are still sixteen columns still standing.

The gigantic Colosseum in Rome is said to have been built almost 2000 years ago. It's still in good condition. Yet in the Middle-Ages it is supposed to have been used as a quarry. - However the age of this edifice probably doesn't exceed 300 years und maybe it's construction has never been completed.

The Gothic period is supposed to have started “at around 1150 AD” with the erection of the Basilica of St Denis near Paris. At around 1200, work on the great French cathedrals of Reims, Amiens and Chartres was started. But it wasn’t until 200 years later that construction work on cathedrals in Gothic style started in German cities, What is more, work continued on these projects for centuries. Did the Gothic style of architecture really prevail for more than half a millennium?

It wasn’t until the advent of the printing press „at about 1500 AD“ that we were able to permanently reproduce texts. Remarkably, however, ancient texts survived and thrived without this technical innovation. Let’s take Homer’s opus for example - it seemingly survived for two thousand years without sacrificing a shred of content.

In the same vein, classical literature from the time of Augustus, “from the Birth of Christ”, managed to stay coherent without the aid of the printing press.

Ancients works like by Vergil, Horace, Ovid, allegedly created in the epoch of Augustus around the Nativity, also valiantly preserved, until the arrival of the saving printing press.

Even the Ancient Romans knew about cement - they utilized it to build the ceiling of the Pantheon in Rome. Unfortunately this innovation was apparently lost to humanity for a period of nearly 1500 years!

The archaeologists have had their work cut out for them regarding the invention of the wheel; they have had to posit a repeated rediscovery of said innovation in order to satisfy the needs of their impossible chronologies.

The history of the discovery and colonization of the New World, like the invention of the wheel, is one prolonged nightmare.

America - at any rate a small collection of insignificant islands in the Bahamas - is supposed to have been discovered “in 1492”. In the “16^th century” Spain was fighting in South America. But are we really meant to believe that English colonization of North America didn’t commence until “1620”?

Australia is said to have been discovered in „1770“, but this is a full 150 years after the Age of Discovery.

The chronology of fabricated history is deeply warped. Despite their eagerness, the fabricators were incapable of filling extended periods with content; resulting in the afore-mentioned lacunae, dark ages and mysterious gaps in time.

The relatively eventful late Roman era was followed by a succession of empty centuries. The time of Charlemagne “at about 800 AD” bristles with details, but is followed by several more uneventful centuries. Historians have to wait until the Late Middle Ages “from 1300 inwards” to find relief from the stagnancy.

The alleged history of the Ancient Orient comprises mostly lacunae, featuring an Ancient Assyrian, Middle Assyrian and Neo-Assyrian Empire awash like islands in centuries of empty time.

The chronology of Ancient Egypt stumbles blindly across the millenia. The flowering of the Egyptian Empire with its pyramids and temples is said to have already come to an end “at around 1100 BC”. There followed a thousand-year stagnation period which was ended with the advent of Cleopatra and Julius Caesar.

The grotesquely extended chronology also forces geologists to stretch out geological time periods to absurd lengths to cover these periods; instead of postulating thousands of years, they reckon in the millions.

Ancient history is a story of heroes, and just like with sagas of old, the critical observer is forced to suspend his or her disbelief.

How was Hannibal ever supposed to have transported a whole herd of elephants from North Africa via Spain and the Maritime Alps to Italy?

Shortly before Hannibal, King Pyrrhus of Epirus in Greece allegedly undertook a similar endeavor and led just as big a herd of elephants to Italy via the Adriatic, but however did he accomplish this great feat?

Incredibly, so the history books tell us, both Charlemagne and Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor, head of the House of Hohenstaufen, led herds of elephants and other exotic animals through northern Italy.

The Carolingian (Frankish) statesman Charles Martell is said to have slaughtered 320,000 Saracens at the twin battles of Tours and Poitiers with a loss of only a few dozen men. Well, after all, as a fervently Christian military leader, Martel had God on his side against the Arab infidel!

The old Swiss Confederates allegedly slaughtered 30,000 of 100,000 Burgundians within half a day at the Battle of Morat (Murten) with equally light losses and despite being in the minority.

In the Thirty Years' War Germany is said to have suffered terrible losses. Most of her cities were razed to the ground leaving only dust and ashes and a decimated population. Within this same time period, however, the copperplate engraver Matthew Merian was creating detailed depictions of German cities. The engravings show beautifully built and nicely designed towns with no trace of destruction in sight; in the foreground we see well-nourished burghers going about their daily business.

Fabricated history is motivated by religious aspirations. It does not differentiate between things sacred and things profane. Historians who cannot discriminate between sacred and profane narratives will never understand the motives of the fabricators of history.

The Bible and its stories are considered to be the foundation of Christianity, but all other historical tales are colored by religious thought. So-called pagan Antiquity - the Greeks and the Romans, the Persians and the Carthaginians - are just as much a part of sacred history as the Christian Middle Ages and the “enlightened” Modern Period.

The parallelisms tell us that the story of Jesus is a variation on the tale of Julius Caesar - or vice versa.

Even the division into epochs indicates a religious prejudice.

The Divine Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Ghost are reflected in the trinity of Antiquity, Middle Ages and Modern Period.

Even in archaeology we can find a similar pattern as evidenced by the divisions into the Stone Age, the Bronze Age and the Iron Age.

History before the start of the 18th Century has been fabricated, but nevertheless real epochs can be uncovered within the narratives, namely Late Antiquity and the Late Middle Ages - but these ages must be transposed to the 18^th Century and not be separated by a time interval of a thousand years.

Old history is fictitious; however, a few real events show through (glitter in the background).

The story of Solomon, for instance, is to be seen in the context of the discovery and colonization of the New World, as can be proven by the allusions to the inflation in the supply of silver in the Bible story.

Woven into the fictitious narrative of the crusades, we can make out the conquests of the western nations - the Franks, Italians, Catalonians and Aragonians - in the Levant. These military expeditions were launched sometime the second third of the 18^th century.

The so-called Punic Wars of Ancient Rome reflect the threat posed to the countries around the western Mediterranean by the North African Saracens in the 18^th century.

Old history also provides us an insight into a few true and easily comprehensible complexes.

I have delved deeply into the origin of place names in Europe and discovered that all proper names referring to countries, rivers and localities have been created simultaneously according to the same principles. The main point to grasp here is the significance of the terms “Vesuvius” and “Naples”, as well as “Troy” and “Ilion”; additionally, a few Christian words and ancient and medieval names for rulers. The uniform naming conventions are evidence of a centralized political will and a ubiquitous “Vesuvian” religion that was in place shortly before the development of languages and written documents. This act of naming, however, is a topic that is shunned by both philologists and historians,

Real historical research didn’t get off the ground until the beginning of the 19^th century; before that, all we had were chronicles and documents.

Historical literature managed to create a smoothed-out version of a fictitious past that seemed plausible, at least on the surface, if all the contradictions, absurdities, lacunae were ignored or trivialized.

Current historical research is still based on literary historiography, garnished with fake documents, created as part of a project during the great initiative to fabricate history.

Old historical documents, however, rest on very shaky foundations. Fomenko maintains that fabricated historical narratives are spun out of very few elements - Petrarca, for instance, managed to weave a rich cloth of ancient and medieval history from invisible threads.

Historical research is aware of the many contradictions in the official historical narratives, but instead of starting afresh with new assumptions they use dirty tricks to maintain the received wisdom; they concentrate on limited topics or they swear that “real” documents, objects or archaeological finds support the “veracity” of events and epochs that are actually illusory.

If the Emperor has no clothes, he can’t be wearing rags!

University departments dedicated to human history as historical geology are caught in a web of orthodoxy and dogmatism and are facing stalemate. Academics, though, need tenure and so it is that around the world thousands of highly talented civil servants - professors, archaeologists and teachers - go on supporting this bizarre view of history - and, understandably, they will not change their tune any time soon.

We desperately need a new science of history. A pre-requisite for this is a new attitude, but which? Pure rationalism and nominalism is not going to bear any fruit; we are going to have to replace orthodox schemes (Antiquity, Middle Ages, and Modern Period) with a system that allows us to look upon things critically and appropriately.

The use of common sense is the main thing needed in order to differentiate the plausible from the absurd.

The literary value of the received wisdom, the Bible, the writings of the Church Fathers, the Ancient Greek, Roman, Medieval and Modern authors including their art and architecture will remain untouched under the application of New Historical Criticism. Who would discard the tales collected by the Brothers’ Grimm just for being patently untrue?

Friedrich Schiller wrote a famous play centered on the mythical figure of William Tell. But why do some people insist, even today, that this master marksman was a living, breathing man?

When considering the past, one also need to bring a species of emotional evidence to bear, a gut feeling - do these events really ring true?

If you follow common sense, you will find it hard to believe that the Egyptian pyramids were built thousands of years ago. In the same way, it is impossible to situate the Palace of Versailles or the Vatican more than four centuries before the present day.

Likewise we can readily relegate Hannibal’s elephants to the land of myth and legend, as we can do with Alexander the Great’s foray into India and Central Asia.

New historical criticism frees us from this dark, historical ballast. Neither the violent Sicilian Vespers nor the bloody St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre ever actually took place. Neither did the gruesome witch hunts raging across Europe and North America.

The more we try to penetrate the veil of the past, the darker things turn. The further we step back, the more valid does the famous epigram attributed to an allegedly ancient Greek philosopher named Socrates become: “I know one thing that I know nothing.”

Finally we have to acknowledge the truth of the statement: “Ignoramus et ignorabimus “ - We do not know and will never know”.

And what about the seeds of mankind, the origin of Earth and the first beginning of the universe? We can apply the wisdom of another philosopher (Ludwig Wittgenstein) to this question - “What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.”