history of mankind has always interested her understatement.The older a particular fact, the more his description of speculation and inaccuracies.Among other things, added the human element and the interests of the rulers.
It is on such common ground and built the "New Chronology".What is special about this theory, stirred up the bulk of academics?
What is the chronology?
Before you talk about non-traditional branch in historical science, is to determine what is the chronology in the classic sense.
So chronology - is supporting the science that deals with several things.
First, it determines when there is an event.
Secondly, following the sequence and position of the incident on the linear scale of years.
It is divided into several departments - astronomical, geological and historical chronology.
Each of these departments has its own set of dating methods and research.These include the ratio of calendars of different cultures, radiocarbon analysis, thermoluminescent method, hydration glass, stratigraphy, dendrochronology, and others.
That is, the classical chronology builds the order of events on the basis of a comprehensive study.She relates the results of the work of scientists from different areas and only in the case of cross-verification of facts makes the final verdict.
Let's look in more detail at other issues raised earlier.Who are Fomenko, Nosovskii?"New Chronology" - a pseudo-science or a new word in the study of human history?
History of origin In general, the theory, the authors of which are Fomenko, Nosovskii ("New Chronology"), based on studies and calculations of NA Morozov.The latter was imprisoned in St. Petersburg, made the calculation positions of the stars, mentioned in the Apocalypse.According to him it appeared that this book is written in the fourth century AD.Not a bit embarrassed, he said fraud in world history.
authors of "New Chronology" precursors Morozova believe Garduena Jesuit and physicist Isaac Newton, who also tried to rethink and recalculate the history of mankind.
first, based on a knowledge of philology, tried to prove that all ancient literature was written in the Middle Ages.Newton also attended to ancient history.He counted the reign of the Pharaohs on the list of Manetho.Judging by the results of his studies, world history was reduced by more than three millennia.
For such "innovators" can also include Edwin Johnson and Robert Baldauf who claimed that mankind no more than a couple of hundred years.
So Morozov takes absolutely fantastic figures on which to base its chronology.What is a thousand years of history?Myth!Stone Age - a I century BC and the second century - the era of bronze, the third - the Iron Age.Did not you know?After all, historical sources rigged in modern times!
Let's take a closer look at this unusual look at the theory and its refutation.
main provisions
According to Fomenko, "New Chronology" is different from the traditional in that it is free from fraud and error.Its main provisions include only five postulates.
Firstly, more or less reliable written sources can be considered only after the eighteenth century.Prior to this, from the eleventh century to the works should be treated with caution.And until the tenth century, people did not know how to write.
All archaeological data can be interpreted as a researcher wants so obvious historical value, they do not carry.
Secondly, the European calendar appeared only in the fifteenth century.Prior to that, each nation had its own calendar and the starting point of reference.From the creation, the flood, from birth or ascension to the throne of the ruler ...
This thesis grows the statement.
Third, historical information on the pages of the chronicles, treatises and other works of godless overlap.Thus, the chronology Nosovskiy argues that most of the events took place in the ancient history of the early Middle Ages or later.But due to the mismatch of calendars and points of reference in the translation, the information is not properly treated and history udrevnyalas.
traditional chronology is wrong at the age of Eastern civilizations and the reference point of human history.Judging from the previous postulate, China and India can not count more than a thousand years of history.
The latter provision is the human factor and the commitment of the Government to legitimize itself.Says Fomenko, written chronology of each power under him, and the old data is lost or destroyed.Therefore, it is impossible to fully understand the history.The only thing that we can rely on it to "accidentally preserved or lost pieces."These include maps, pages of different chronicles and other documents confirming the theory.
The argument based on the texts
main evidence in this area is "far-fetched" likeness of four historical eras and events in the annals of repeatability.
key period is 330 years, in 1050 and 1800. That is, if you take away from the medieval events is the number of years we run into full compliance incidents.
It shows a coincidence of various historical figures who, according to the theory of Fomenko, are one and the same person.
Under such conclusions adjusted the chronology of Ukraine, Russia and Europe.Most contradictory sources ignored or declared a forgery.
astronomical methods
When disputes arise in certain disciplines, trying to attract the results of studies of the related sciences.
According to Fomenko, "New Chronology" excellent check and prove its postulates using ancient astronomical charts.By studying these documents, it is repelled by the eclipses (solar and lunar) and references to comets, in fact, the image of the constellations.
main source, which is based on evidence, is the "Almagest".This treatise, which was Alexandrian Claudius Ptolemy in the middle of the second century AD.But Fomenko, after studying the document, dating it to four hundred years later, that is at least the sixth century.
is noteworthy that in order to prove the theory of the "Almagest" was taken only eight stars (although the document recorded more than a thousand).Only these were declared "right", and the rest - "forged".
main proof of the theory in terms of the composition of Libya eclipses acts of the Peloponnesian War.It shows three events: two solar and one lunar eclipse.
catch is that Livy wrote about the events of the whole peninsula, and said that "the day the stars were visible."That is, the eclipse was total.According to other sources, in Athens at that time was observed partial eclipse.
Based on this inaccuracy, Fomenko argues that full compliance with the data of Libya was only in the eleventh century AD.Because of this, it automatically transfers all ancient history at the millennium and a half ahead.
Despite the fact that most of the data about the constellations coincides with the "traditional" story, which is based on the chronology of the world, they are not considered valid.All these sources are declared to be "doctored" in the Middle Ages.
Evidence from other sciences
are unfounded accusations against dendrological Novgorod scale, which was confirmed on thousands of examples.Group Fomenko believes the data adjusted to the falsified history.
On the other hand, is under attack radiocarbon analysis.But the remarks in his address inconsistent.This method around the error, besides times when they checked the age of the Shroud of Turin.It was then that everything was "done accurately and honestly."
What "Doubt" based "New Chronology"
Let's see what else there is a group Fomenko shortcomings in traditional science.The main attacks are historical research methods.And often found at the thesis "double criteria".In the case of academic science or that method is declared falsification, among the fans as "New Chronology" He is the only correct one.
first doubts undergone chronology books.Based on the writings of historians, the chronicles and decrees officials Fomenko and frost create his theory.However, millions of pages of simple letters, business documents and other "popular" records are ignored.
«Scaligerian" dating abolished due to the use of astrology, and the other researchers did not take into account.
Most of the documents declared false.This judgment is based on the fact that hardly distinguish the source of the late Middle Ages from the ancient.Relying on well-known falsification thesis shows the unreliability of all the books, "supposedly created until the middle of the first millennium."
basically the same evidence base, which is based on the "New Chronology" Nosovskii Fomenko and build on the cultural proximity of Antiquity and the Renaissance.
Events early Middle Ages, when it was forgotten by most of the ancient knowledge, declared nonsense and fiction.Group Fomenko claims that there is some evidence of irrationality of such a model.
Firstly, you can not "forget" and then just "remember" whole areas of scientific knowledge.
Secondly, what it means to "restore" the research data centuries ago?To preserve knowledge must be scientific schools, where information is passed from teacher to student.
From such judgments concluded that the entire history of antiquity - it's just an artificially Antiquating events of the Middle Ages.
especially groups interested in the chronology of Fomenko Russia.From the data it displays information about the allegedly existing medieval empire "Russian Khans", which covers the whole of Eurasia.
general scientific criticism
Many scientists disagree with the precepts put forward by "New Chronology".What, for example, "to reject the wrong scientific theories"?It turns out that only Fomenko, based on the notes Morozov has "true" knowledge.
fact, there are three things that are very confused by any sane person.
Firstly, rejecting the traditional chronology, the group Fomenko thus all the sciences in general strikes, which indirectly confirm the academic data.That is, linguists, archaeologists, numismatists, geologists, anthropologists and other experts in anything quite do not understand, but simply build their hypothesis on the basis of erroneous arguments.
second problem is obvious inconsistencies in many places.This is one era to confirm the map of the sky is completely different period.Thus, all the facts are adjusted to the desired frame.
This includes mismatch alleged "repeated" historical figures.For example, Solomon Caesar - this is one and the same person, as the "New Chronology".What is the forty years of the first four against the second for the layman?Does not match?Then, in the eighteenth century falsified!
last argument that defines this theory as pseudoscience, is as follows.On the basis of numerous "corrections", it appears that there is a worldwide conspiracy "is not clear-of-society", which could secretly rewrite the history of mankind.And it was done in the Middle Ages and modern times, when there was the formation of states and about any community and consolidation was not the question.
last thing openly excited the scientific community, there was a clear attack on academic professionalism.If you count the theory of "New Chronology" true, it appears that all the scientists are just playing in the sandbox, and does not understand even basic things.Not to mention common sense.
Why outraged astronomers
The main stumbling block was the "Almagest".If we discard the ones the stars, which is based on the theory of Fomenko (they can not be dated unambiguously), the resulting picture is identical to the traditional.
In the early twenty-first century was made by counting the movements of stars using the latest techniques and computers.All data Ptolemy and Hipparchus were confirmed.
Thus, scientists caused outrage unfounded attacks on their professionalism by complete amateurs.
answer historians, linguists and archaeologists
In the area of influence of these disciplines heated debate.Firstly, we stood up for dendrochronology and radiocarbon analysis.Judging by the statements Fomenko, he figures for 1960.These sciences have long stepped forward.Their methods support traditional history and confirmed by related methods.These include clay belt, paleomagnetic and potassium-argon methods, and so on.
unexpected turn become birch bark.Judging by the fact that describes the "New Chronology" Russian history is contrary to these sources of information.The latter, incidentally, is not only confirmed by dendrochronology, and many other data from related disciplines.
also interesting to a complete disregard of Arab, Armenian, Chinese, and other written evidence, which confirms the traditional history of Europe.It mentions only those facts that confirm the theory.
emphasis on narrative sources puts fans of "New Chronology" in an awkward position.Their arguments are broken down into dust usual administrative and economic records.
If you look at the linguistic evidence Fomenko, then, according to Zalizniak AA, "is sheer amateurism at the level of error in the multiplication table."For example, Latin declared descendant of the Old Slavonic, and "Samara" when read backwards into a "dialect pronunciation of the word Rome."
dates and names on coins, medals, gems fully confirm the academic data.Moreover, the amount of this material is simply exclude the possibility of forgery.
addition, the chronology of the war, the authors belonging to different cultures, coincides with the calendar bringing to a common denominator.There is even some evidence that in the Middle Ages simply were not known, and opened only thanks to the excavations in the twentieth century.
conclusion of scientists about "New Chronology"
First, today the mainstream listening to the works of Scaliger as much as they are confirmed by the latest research.
Conversely, at the Fomenko with Nosovskaya in papers only contain attacks on this scholar of the sixteenth century.But there is no footnotes or references to source citations or explicit indication of error.
Secondly, the complete disregard for business records.All the evidence base is built on selected chronicles and other documents that show only a one-sided event.Lack of a comprehensive study.
Third, the so-called "vicious circle dating" disappears by itself.That is, the supporters of the "New Chronology" trying to prove that, based on false premises initially, most of the methods simply multiply the error.But this is not true, as opposed to their own procedures, which are often unsubstantiated and unfounded.
Finally.The notorious "conspiracy of forgery."He built all the proof, but if you approach from the point of view of common sense, the arguments crumble like a house of cards.
Is it possible to secretly collect all the books, decrees, letters, rewrite them in a new way and return to the field.In addition, the enormous amount of archaeological finds just do not really fake.Also, the concept of the cultural layer, stratigraphy, and other typical aspects of archeology completely known theoreticians of the "New Chronology".
