The early middle ages never happened

What images does your mind produce when I say "18th and 19th Century"? Industrial Revolution, right? And what about 16th Century? Ships and Discoverers probably. And what comes to mind when I say the year 50 or 100? The late Roman Empire, presumably. And 2000 B.C. probably brings Ancient Egypt to mind.

Many, when you ask them about what happened between the year 600 and 1100 have a blank mind. Empty. Nothing. What did they teach about that time in History class? Not much. Because so little is known about the early middle ages that they are referred to as Dark Ages. Some believe that the middle ages or at least the early middle ages did not exist!

Map of Europe in the 5th Century:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ef197cf9d235.png[/atsimg]

One example of this idea is represented by the Phantom Time Hypothesis:

It proposes that there has been a systematic effort to make it appear that periods of history, specifically that of Europe during Early Middle Ages (AD 614–911) exist, when they do not. Illig believed that this was achieved through the alteration, misrepresentation and forgery of documentary and physical evidence.[1]

By the time the Gregorian calendar was introduced in AD 1582, the old Julian calendar should have produced a discrepancy of thirteen days between it and the real (or tropical) calendar. Instead, the astronomers and mathematicians working for Pope Gregory had found that the civil calendar needed to be adjusted by only ten days. From this, Illig concludes that the AD era had counted roughly three centuries which never existed.[2]

The basis of Illig's hypothesis is the paucity of archaeological evidence that can be reliably dated to the period AD 614–911, on perceived inadequacies of radiometric and dendrochronological methods of dating this period, and on the over-reliance of medieval historians on written sources. For Western Europe, Illig claims the presence of Romanesque architecture in the tenth century as evidence that less than half a millennium could have passed since the fall of the Roman Empire, and concludes that the entire Carolingian period, including the person of Charlemagne, is a forgery of medieval chroniclers, more precisely a conspiracy instigated by Otto III and Gerbert d'Aurillac.

Read more at the Wikipedia-Entry.

Map of Europe in 1328:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2274a965cd57.png[/atsimg]

The two maps shown are from the Wikipedia-Entry on "the middle ages". I would have liked to post a map of the time in question but the entry does not contain one. According to the Phantom-Time Theory, the changes seen from Map 1 to 2 took not 700 years but 500.

Whether this specific Theory is true or not, its easy to imagine that parts of History have been fabricated or manipulated by "the powers that be" of various times. Who is to stop any Empire of any Period of time simply write chronology the way they see fit...

Of Course I wont rule out the very real possibility that I only find this theory interesting because I am completely ignorant

What do you think?

Interesting idea, but I think that the documentation from China and the Middle East would discredit this idea. I just can't see the whole world agreeing to fake almost 300 years of history for the Vatican.

I can think of at least one major flaw of this theory.

To believe it means to believe that Islam wet along with it for some reason.

Which I don't buy.

Islam was a power in the Mid east for a long time, hence the crusades.



[edit on 7-7-2010 by pablos]

reply to post by Skyfloating

My own thoughts, as an addict of history, are;
That the suggested conspiracy serves no useful purpose for the suggested conspirators.
That the suggested conspiracy would have involved an impossible amount of work on the part of conspirators, forging chronicles and other documents all over Europe. There was a comparative shortage of documents in this period, for obvious social reasons, but they weren't absent altogether.

"Over-reliance on written sources" indeed! Youtube had not been invented in those days, so what else are they supposed to use?

I have volumes of the Cambridge Mediaeval History on my bookshelves. I'm sure the Bibliography pages could supply me with a bundle of sources for any century that author wants to question. But of course once the assumption is made that "all the evidence has been planted by someone", the facts of history can be turned into anything the theorist wants to imagine.



[edit on 7-7-2010 by DISRAELI]

Interesting theory. Do you have any more evidence or statistics to back it up? Because you're gonna need it once people come on here and start tearing your claim up.

reply to post by Skyfloating


There is talk that Jesus went to England, where he became the legend of Camelot. There was no corpse and the lies by Rome that he ascended to heaven is likely made up.

So, if the bishops of Rome lied about that, then they also needed to erase history and burn the witches at the stake, as it were.

Northern Scotland is still at war, between the Catholics and Non Catholics. I think this is also a spin off from these dark ages, where those bishops of Rome were sanitizing European history. We really need to see their agenda, before making any sense of what went on.

reply to post by Skyfloating

Whether this specific Theory is true or not, its easy to imagine that parts of History have been fabricated or manipulated by "the powers that be" of various times. Who is to stop any Empire of any Period of time simply write chronology the way they see fit...

Of Course I wont rule out the very real possibility that I only find this theory interesting because I am completely ignorant

What do you think?

Complete rubbish if you ask me. In order for the supposed "powers that be" to fabricate a whole 300 years of history they would need to 'pay off' every single historian and archeologist that deals with that "fabricated" period. This would inevitably include all students going into the field as someone would quickly catch on. Most cases of these claims come not from historians, but from people selling sensationalized books making money off selling some idea of a conspiracy in history.

Well it's comforting to know that even Mods can put forth some real stinkers time to time.
Like some of the other replies, this just doesn't seem likely, and barely even possible (if at all).
This would require the entire world at the time to agree to it, and for nobody to make any written records whatsoever. While there aren't many records as far as Europe is concerned, there are some.

[edit on 7/7/2010 by Chamberf=6]

There are not enough words, nor words strong enough, to describe how ridiculous this idea is. For this idea to work, the author would have to produce a convincing argument about why written records produced by other cultures during the same time period are either fact or inaccurate, or how certain events took place (such as the invention, then ascension of Islam) in context of these missing years.

Hey Skyfloating. Are you saying your theory is much like what the Catholics did when they met and Came Up with the proper books of the Bible and toss the others to the side-which now hardly anyone knows about?

A whole empire was Re-directed, if you will. History re-written, changed and put forth as the truth.

I think you bring up an excelent point about the lack of history of this time period. Maybe we can get some education going on this topic here. I am sure we have many great minds here with knowledge or access to info.

Tough crowd tonight!~

Edit to add: I would love to know the Chinese history for this time. Any experts can give a quick over-view.

[edit on 7/7/2010 by anon72]

I won't say you studied history in the US, it's too obvious!

In the case you studied history anywhere else, ask for your money back!

Here is a list of Byzantine Emperors (the empire known as Eastern Roman Empire) between 610 AD and ~1100 AD (scroll a bit down). Documented and presented as they should!

And that is an example from Europe. India and China (not to mention the Arabs who had their Golden Age during that time) were very much "active" around those centuries with meticulous records too.

Let's just not include this thread in the CV, OK?

reply to post by anon72


Google Tang Dynasty

mandatory second line

There's more evidence, in fact, that the so-called "Dark Ages" didn't allude to a period of ignorance and neglect on the part of historians, but that "Dark Ages" referred to a physical darkening of the Earth's skies for a number of centuries, most probably due to extraordinary volcanic activity. The suspected culprit is the great volcano Krakatau.

Were the Dark Ages Triggered by Volcano-Related Climate Changes in the 6th Century?

Modern history has its origins in the tumultuous 6th and 7th centuries. During this period agricultural failures and the emergence of the plague contributed to: (1) the demise of ancient super cities, old Persia, Indonesian civilizations, the Nasca culture of South America, and southern Arabian civilizations; (2) the schism of the Roman Empire with the conception of many nation states and the re-birth of a united China; and (3) the origin and spread of Islam while Arian Christianity disappeared. In his book, Catastrophe An Investigation into the Origins of the Modern World, author David Keys explores history and archaeology to link all of these human upheavals to climate destabilization brought on by a natural catastrophe, with strong evidence from tree-ring and ice-core data that it occurred in 535 AD. With no supporting evidence for an impact-related event, I worked with Keys to narrow down the possibilities for a volcanic eruption that could affect both hemispheres and bring about several decades of disrupted climate patterns, most notably colder and drier weather in Europe and Asia, where descriptions of months with diminished sun light, persistent cold, and anomalous summer snow falls are recorded in 6th-century written accounts. Writings from China and Indonesia describe rare atmospheric phenomena that possibly point to a volcano in the Indonesian arc. Although radiocarbon dating of eruptions in that part of the world are spotty, there is strong bathymetric and volcanic evidence that Krakatau might have experienced a huge caldera eruption.

— Doc Velocity






[edit on 7/7/2010 by Doc Velocity]

You also can't discount the fact that smallpox wiped out 50-60% of Europe's population from the middle of the 6th century to the end of the 7th. When people are trying to survive they're much less worried about keeping records for future generations to live vicariously through.

Originally posted by win 52
I think this is also a spin off from these dark ages, where those bishops of Rome were sanitizing European history.

On the other hand, the Romans brought an enlightenment to Europe that had not existed for 3000 years prior, since the time of the ancient Aryans. Who better to rewrite history than the Romans, an advanced civilization that brought a savage and backwards continent to the doorstep of the modern age?

Sorry, I can't help but trot out one of my favorite props in defense of Rome...



— Doc Velocity





[edit on 7/7/2010 by Doc Velocity]

Dang, tough crowd tonight.

I didn't think the idea, or really part of the idea, was all that bad or off base. While I don't think that 300 years where just created "out of thin air", so to speak, I still don't see it to be that hard to rewrite history or the time periods when some events in history occurred. I would think that it would be really easy to get your time periods all in a jumble with something as innocent as switching the type of calendar used.

Say you have event A, which occurred in 200 BC for calender type 1. You switch to calender type 2, do the math, and think that event A occurred in 100 BC. Before you know it, all types of events are said to take place at times when they didn't. Doesn't have to be some grand conspiracy, could just be a simple mistake that is now so big nobody wants to even try to fix it.

And of course, its not like anyone every faked any type of document during the course of history.

Originally posted by anon72

Edit to add: I would love to know the Chinese history for this time. Any experts can give a quick over-view.

[edit on 7/7/2010 by anon72]

I'm far from an expert, however, here we go...

Tang Dynasty 618-907

Five Dynasties 907-960

-Later Liang Dynasty 907-923
-Later Tang Dynasty 923-936
-Later Jin Dynasty 936-947
-Later Han Dynasty 947-950
-Later Zhou Dynasty 951-960

Song Dynasty 960-1279

-Northern Song Dynasty 960-1127
-Southern Song Dynasty 1127-1279

Well, the Chinese certainly seem to have had a lot on their plate for the time period in question.

Still, nice thread S.F.

I really love the far-out stuff.

Originally posted by riddle6
Dang, tough crowd tonight.

Try walking in my shoes for a week... I wake up with decapitated horse heads in my bed every fekking morning.

Originally posted by riddle6
Say you have event A, which occurred in 200 BC for calender type 1. You switch to calender type 2, do the math, and think that event A occurred in 100 BC. Before you know it, all types of events are said to take place at times when they didn't. Doesn't have to be some grand conspiracy, could just be a simple mistake that is now so big nobody wants to even try to fix it.

I understand your point, just not sure we have any actual missing time on the scale of centuries. I mean, sure, the various historical dates we've all been taught may have little or no chronological validity — the American Independence Day, for example, which is typically celebrated on July 4th, really has nothing to do with July 4th. Documents were signed on July 2nd, ratified on July 6th, and finally publicized to the masses by July 8th, as I recall. As a national holiday, the date July 4th was chosen arbitrarily.

— Doc Velocity

reply to post by univac500


Dang, You on this one!

Thank you.

And thank you darkelf

Time to educate a bit.

OK I'll bite..... sigh~ though I'm pretty sure this thread is taking the mickey my friend

Western Civilisation as in the Roman Empire declined with the attacks on Rome from the North and disease, the empire however was Hellenised and flourished in this period in Byzantium. There is more than enough evidence from icons to buildings to writings and mosaics that this period and empire were far reaching and documented fact.

Additionally Centres of learning were based more in the Arab world, had it not been for the Arabs, we likely would have lost many of the writings of Classical philosophers, they held the old libraries, and did not destroy the information as 'heresy'. They also made great contributions to math and science at this time, whilst Western Europe flayed around in pits and fields and chanted latin and breathed in incense. The tombs, writings, art, music etc, all over the place are all made up? and dated incorrectly? HUndreds of cemeteries have fake chiselled date of birth and death on them?....lol


As for Charlamagne, we have Dinars and other coins from this period, an expensive way to hoax a time period.....
We have royal decrees and his insignia
Gospels attributed to his patronage and reform,
His throne.
Images of his coronation dating to his time period.

Basing "history" on a select group of people, ie western Europe is discounting the plethora of information for all other histories from other cultures from around the world. There are a multitude of manuscripts with a level of detail that would denounce the notion he and his era and the rest of the middle ages are made up, example the Chanson de geste includes his campaigns and his aid to the Pope. His entire reign he was engaged in battles, and they are all pretty much documented. The monk Bobio at the time of his death penned a mourning song for him which is known to this day, there is also a treasury in Aachen at his tomb...I could go on for hours...but yes safe to say he existed....Though his presence has been greatly embellished over time to make him a romantic founding father renaissance type man.

Charlemagne actually formed a western Europe identity moving from a Roman identity, and he challenged almost the Emperor in Constantinople.

The middle ages existed, economy and church made it a tough time to live in for the west and a tough time to record information that was not royal or religion, Humanism showed up in the Renaissance. But thats not to say it was not recorded elsewhere.
There was this 'humanist and scientific' learning in other parts other than the west. Byzantium, and the Saracens etc really didn't care about who Robin Hood was They were of a high culture...not Serfdom controlled by the church in Rome.


[edit on 7-7-2010 by zazzafrazz]