This truly is a time of shredding and so, our sense of history - how we mark time itself - is part of what's being undone. Oh, good!
"...that could change your entire understanding that the passage of time is an invention of the oligarchs, not just individual histories."
We don't know when stuff happened, what year it actually is (Clif HIgh has talked about this) our history let alone the world's or even the actual size of the earth. Are there two suns? (Some people have seen two.)
In other words we're in a mystery with stories, and those stories create a worldview that makes 'us' easier to manage and 'them' easier to stay in charge.
I don't think this is the first time an entire reality-reset has happened. Howdie Mickoski has done some good work on this and he posits that the worlds fairs and expositions are part of the 'how' they roll out new history narratives.
I've been starting the Course again from the beginning of the text and it talks about how atOnement is the only tool that isn't double-edged and can't be used for destruction. We correct mistakes by moving forward in forgiveness but we're really moving backwards in time to our true state of atOnement, at which point time will have served its purpose and disappear.
I've continually had that sense. The more that I give people the benefit of the doubt, the more I find the history that confirms people are good and have wanted to just get along. It's a handful of people with bad ideas that convinced us otherwise.
It's interesting to think that the OG Psyops may have been a conspiracy of three people a little over 1000 yrs ago. It also reminds me of Jekyll Island when the Rothschilds and Rockefellers divvied up money, media, education and medicine between themselves.
Like my question into what happened in the world wars, I now expect that evidence will drop into my open hand, things that were in plain sight but invisible because I wasn't looking.
Very interesting about Clif High and about the world fairs. That makes perfect sense!
"...by moving forward in forgiveness but we're really moving backwards in time to our true state of atOnement."
I love that. Feels right. We're 'undoing' externally in the world and internally in ourselves and we end up where we always, really were.
"Like my question into what happened in the world wars, I now expect that evidence will drop into my open hand, things that were in plain sight but invisible because I wasn't looking."
Yes it is amazing how that works isn't it? Very much brings to mind 'As you seek so shall you find.'
Henry would know. I haven't yet ordered his two-volume writings but I'm interested. Certainly his perspective on the world wars, and who caused them, is something I've come around to.
I read Henry Ford's biography some years ago and did not take his comment seriously.
I thought he was just grandstanding.
However, having now read your Third Paradigm, something else comes to mind. When I was at grammar school in England from 1951 to 1958 everyone was required to take Religious Instruction 40 minutes per week that included reading some of the Old Testament. In one of the books, maybe Kings if I remember correctly, some of the notable Hebrews lived for hundreds of years. Of course I knew that this was impossible and wondered why this had entered the record. It now seems likely that the scribes had to find a way of making the data fit the calendar by increasing life spans.
The patriarchs would have been all BC or before the common era. I've read that their ages add up to some occult number, I forget the details. It's certainly a fiction.
Interesting stuff. Maybe you could retitle your substack as "Everything You Know is Wrong" (unless Firesign Theater has already trademarked that title).
Hi Tereza, I'm new to your page (and Substack for that matter). Still exploring both.
I like this article. In fact, I like articles, essays, etc. not becaues I agree with them, but, more importantly, because they direct attention to something worth thinking about and discussing. That's certainly the case here. Thanks!
What this article makes clear is that History is not about the past. Past events are inaccessible.
History is about documents (and artifacts) written, read, and interpreted in the present.
In short, History is about Interpretation. The interpretations of both the historian and the reader.
Of course, more is involved, a lot more. But that ought to be enough for a comment response.
Thanks again for this article. I look forward to reading more.
Paul, how nice to be read by a (relative) Substack virgin ;-) Sometimes I get subs where I am their 375th and I can't help but wonder if they're bots or self-promoting, since no one can keep up with that. In this case, you've jumped in the deep end, I have to say.
And I share your criteria. I only read what has the power to change my mind about something that makes a difference, that matters. Glad this article met your criteria.
What an excellent point that History is about the present and is always an interpretation. My dogma, as I often say, is that people are inherently good and, when they behave badly, systems and stories are to blame. So my filter on what I read is scanning for evidence that false stories and the systems they validate have warped our view of human nature.
And I also claim my bias as 'a preferential option' for mothers. I see things from a mother's perspective and, while empires may be good for some and bad for others, they're never good for children as a whole.
Right, and that's exactly what Guyenot is addressing when he talks about the accepted theory for the commonality between Vulgar Latin, as it's termed, and Romanian. Sorry, I'm taking a dense book with 400 endnotes and giving the elevator pitch. The Byzantines called themselves Rhomaioi and Kaldellis, who I quoted, wrote Romanland: Ethnicity and Empire in Byzantium. He asserts they were referring to ancient Italian ethnicity.
But Laurent shows how 3 of Kaldellis' 8 examples illustrate the opposite. In one, people captured in the Balkans have children who inherit the genos of the Romans. In 1246, a people state they are pure Romans in their genos because they're from Philippopilis, Bulgaria today. In 867, people from around Constantinople are resettled in Italy and a 12th c history says that's why they have Roman customs to this day, unlike their neighbors. There are more.
I'm certainly not doing it justice. But it's a technique that is evident to me in my intensive study of the gospels--when writing a fiction, create your own corroborating sources with small differences of perspective. It's again what we've seen with the world wars. So extending that possibility to the first millennia isn't such a stretch.
Oh btw, in a discussion on apocalypso with Isaac Middle, I recommended the Mingo Crusaders, who I've listened to at least a dozen times since you recommended it: https://conspirat.substack.com/p/wef-world-entertainment-friday-week-fd7. I'm now making my way through the rest of the WEF World Entertainment Fridays. He subbed immediately!
History and the passage of time is as important to the idea of power and control as any other factor.
As I continue my own trauma work and the discovery of cracks in my perception of my life and history, I can see how it would be a relatively simple task to change "history" over the course of merely a few generations.
What an important correlation you bring up, Philip. Maybe, as in personal trauma, the first step to healing is seeing things as they actually happened. To do that requires suspending judgment of everyone concerned, and letting go of 'heroes' too. And then, maybe, it leaves room for seeing that everyone was doing the best they could but here is the thing (not the person) that prevented them from being able to do better. Let's change that thing.
WOW what a researcher Guyénot! His educational background definitely contributes to his fascinating research.
Also thanks to you and Nefahotep for trying to extract truth from an incredible web of lies.
Importance of trying to elucidate the truth of history of this region of the world, is of critical importance to understanding the true civilizational development of the Levant, Europe and Asia Minor (present day Turkey). This has a lot of relevance to current events in these regions and the shaping of the emerging civilizational world.
And now that I've finished with Guyenot, your book is up next, Fadi! Although I may need to intersperse it with something lighter since I just finished the three volume Poppy Wars. Although ostensibly fiction, they allegorize Chinese military history against the West in a way that is as utterly realistic and depressing as anything I've read. I may do an episode on them.
Agreed on elucidating the truth of the history of this region of the world. I loved that first quote of Laurent's on the global conquest of chronologies and their homogenization. Other cultures and languages are where the real history wouldn't have been entirely erased. I even wonder if that effects The Poppy Wars. Although completely anti-imperial, it conveys an inevitability of the 'Hesperians,' as she calls them, winning because they're centuries ahead in technology. But maybe not. Laurent shows that Western history gives that impression by artificially inflating Western chronology while China stands relatively still--in ways that make no sense. So the defeatism--even wondering if Hesperians really are superior--seeps into even an anti-imperial hyper-realistic fiction.
Thank you, again, for reading and adding your knowledge to my thread, Fadi.
Quote: "Although completely anti-imperial, it conveys an inevitability of the 'Hesperians,' as she calls them, winning because they're centuries ahead in technology. But maybe not.
Not. You will realize this when you read Why The West Can't win. Not only are the Chinese ahead in all spheres including technology, but also the Persians (Iran) and the Orthodox (Russia).
I'm very much enjoying the intro and first chapter on the historical perspective. Very interesting patterns on % of population vs. % of GDP and the rise of colonization in different areas. And great comparison of China and India as real independence through military victory vs economic colonization. Yes, the 'Gandhification' of India, to take the victory away from the militants and make it into a colonial concession, was definitely a ploy.
And when my book does arrive via your son, you'll see that I also write about the 'CFA francenstein.' It was a complete shock to realize that 14 Africans countries are forced to deposit 85% of their foreign exchange earnings in the French treasury, where the Paris bourse invests it for their own interests. And those countries need to borrow their own money back at interest, which can't exceed 20% of public revenues, while France determines the exchange rate. How do we not know this?
To your list of African leaders with alternative currencies, who were assassinated, I'd add Qaddafi and Laurent Gbagbo, President of the Cote d'Ivoire, and the pan-African dinar.
This is fascinating. I have been learning about old world buildings, and through that the possibility of huge swaths of history being completely fraudulent and made up. Time is such a slippery and malleable thing. I am going to find this book.
I'm looking for more books questioning the chronology we have been given of the history of humanity. I wonder if you have any suggestions re: Diacu's The Lost Millennium, Worlds in Collision or other work by Immanuel Velikovsky, anything by Anatoly Fomenko, etc. These seem to be central names in suggesting that a lot of the history we think is real has been made up by various people for various reasons. I am finding the whole notion utterly fascinating and I thank you for bringing it up!
My suggestion would be that you start with Anno Domini and go deeper into his 400 endnotes from there. He really gives a very succinct summary, which I'm not doing justice to. Each of the chapters will have rabbit holes, so you can take your pick. So glad I've been able to introduce you to this and I'll be learning from you next time. I don't know the other books but they sound intriguing, and I look forward to learning about them from you.
Yes, I would agree that there is much about The Church of Rome, the city of Rome, the Latin language and the chronologies and histories that suggests fakery and forgery.
Roman Catholicism seems to be a re-branding of Mithraism with added Christian bits to create an effective control mechanism that could hold the Roman Empire together much more cheaply than could a military machine.
According to the Ancient British histories, Constantine The Great’s mother was the British Princess Helen, who married Emperor Constantine Chlorus, who ruled the Western Empire from Britain (Italy was - as you say - in a state of anarchy). Helen, daughter of King Coel Godebog (Old King Cole, the merry old soul of the nursery rhyme), was of The Third Holy Family of Britain, making Constantine also a descendant of The Holy Family. He was raised an Apostolic British Christian; so his beliefs would have been more Gnostic or Cathar than Mithraic/Pauline. Constantine Chlorus appointed the leading Christian scholar of the day, Lactantius, as the young Constantine The Great’s tutor.
That Constantine The Great did not become a Christian until later in life is just one of the many lies told by The Church of Rome. British kings liked to wait until they were old before being baptised so that the baptism would wash away their sins, leaving them relatively pure and ready to enter heaven. After baptism, they would often abdicate and spend their last years in a monastery to avoid having any more blood on their hands, and so on.
Incidentally, another lie told by Rome is that Saint Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. In fact, there is no evidence that Peter was ever in Rome. Christianity actually arrived in Rome from Britain in AD 51, when the Romans captured the Christian British King Caradoc I and his family and took them to Rome in triumph. The first Bishop of Rome was actually Caradoc’s son, Linus.
You point a finger at the Medicis. I think you are right to do so. You also mention Fomenko. His work very much agrees with that of the British forensic historians, Wilson and Blackett:
As for the Scythians, you may recall that Andrew Power wrote a lot about them in “Ireland, Land of The Pharaohs.” He says they were Aryans, so Iranian/Persian would make sense - survivors of Atlantis’s cataclysm. As some of the Cimmerians became the Ancient British/Welsh, so some of the Scythians became the Scots and Irish.
Adrian Gilbert points us (at 53:20) to Ancient Persian stone reliefs that tell us that the Scythians, like the Cimmerians/Khumry, were Israelites, descendants of the so-called “Lost” Tribes of Israel; so similarities with the Habiru/Hebrews should be expected:
As for Latin, many scholars have noted the similarities between it and Hebrew and Coelbren/Ancient British/Welsh. Welsh is one of the oldest living languages in the world - if not the oldest - tracing its origins back though Ancient Assyria to Ancient Egypt:
As always, Tirion, you bring so much to chew on. If I could, I'd like to step backward and see if I can phrase our underlying hypotheses, what we're gathering evidence for. This, of course, is just a draft for yours, a guess based on what I remember, which may not be correct.
You (perhaps): Empire (some ruling over others) is divinely ordained and Jesus was born into a royal family and his descendants are divinely ordained to rule. What's been misconstrued is who that should be, through the manipulation of religion and history. The Scythians (who, yes, I do remember from Andrew Power) brought advanced development and knowledge everywhere they went, which is why they ended up ruling as tall stature, blond or red-headed kings and queens. They may be a different race or even descendants from a different planet.
Me: The concept of empire (rule by foreign rulers or some over others, not self rule) is what keeps us from solving our own problems. Empire is the opposite of the rule of God, to whom all are equally beloved. Empire was established in three autonomous regions, as Frances Leader writes: economic control in the City of London, theocratic control in the Vatican and military control from Wash DC. Those wielding these three tools have changed names but can be identified throughout history and modernity because they use conquest--taking over other people's lands and setting themselves up as rulers or the power behind the rulers. Identifying the means by which this is done is my purpose, and then looking at the people as secondary.
There's more I want to say but I need to go soon, and maybe it would be good to check in with you on this first anyway. What are your thoughts?
Tereza, I'm not trying to gather evidence to support any hypothesis. I'm trying to establish the truth about life, the universe and everything. Anyway, thanks for your time.
You know I respect you, Tirion, I'm not trying to offend. Everyone who does research has a hypothesis they're honing. The material you could read is functionally infinite--you have to choose based on your interests. In any field of study, there's a myriad of choices. I think we all have a dogma, a bias and one hypothesis at least. My dogma is that people are inherently equally moral, and my bias is for mothers. My hypotheses are open to change based on the evidence I find, but not in ways that contradict my dogma. I see things from the perspective of my bias, which isn't a bad thing. It's necessary to know what experience you bring and claim it.
The phrase 'holy royal family' conveys a divine right of kings, doesn't it? That there are people who are born to rule over others? So your worldview includes that possibility, yes? You're one of the best-read people I know and always bring salient points and references. I was just clarifying that our hypotheses, I think, differ.
Oh, I’m putting that book on my queue. Absolutely fascinating!
Everything I’ve learned about the Roman’s has been from I, Claudius. 😆 but yes, we (Balkan folk) have always wondered why Romania doesn’t have a Slav language or a Cyrillic alphabet. And why the Roma people were nomadic when clearly their look and language closely resembled Persian ancestry. I’m also realizing I might have been mispronouncing “Caucuses” all my life. I thought the accent was on the first syllable. Oops.
Now, I listened to this while walking my dog and I made a mental note to slide in your comments to add my three cents (inflation) in regards to Konstantin, but then you got a vocal laugh out of me when you mentioned my name as if you knew what I was thinking and it totally startled my fur baby.
Oh don't take your pronunciation cues from me! I was realizing how many names I'd only read and never heard spoken while I was recording it. Caucuses was one but there were many more I was shaky on but proceeding as if I knew--like Trajan.
Yes, the Roma people completely came to mind for me too. Where do they fit in? This whole area around Constantinople is a complete mystery to me and now it turns out that it's the true cradle of civilization. Please add your three cents, and I'll even go you four, on Konstantin.
I don’t remember all that much. But the fact that Constantinople (modern day Istanbul) was the Roman capital during his reign and that he was sympathetic to Christianity (I think I remember him being baptized by an Orthodox priest, might be wrong) points to his roots being either Byzantium or Greek.
I am not quite ready to move to this fourth paradigm with Laurent Guyénot when I haven’t even grasped the first, second and THIRD paradigms of history. I’ll now have to read/listen to (amongst others) “The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides” and see where that fits
Thanks for those excellent suggestions Julius! I have my other books from Money Tree in the queue to read also: Hellstorm and The Myth of German Villainy and the 6 Million: Fact or Fiction? But I should likely order those now because who knows when access might be cut off?
Joe Atwill sent me a link to a paper he's referenced "in a lengthy debate concerning Formenko's dating system. The Greenland ice sheets are the best clock we have and they clearly show the Roman imperial era was 2,000 years ago. While I am not a fan of AD, the data shows it is more less correct."
I haven't responded yet but what strikes me is that the Greenland ice sheets wouldn't have recorded the names of who was doing what. Or whether it was being done under conquest and exploitation or industrial progress and development. Would it show whether the mining pollution was coming from Rome or Byzantium? I'd need to read the paper further.
With this idea, like all new ideas, I'm holding it lightly in the back of my mind. If it's true, I think that more evidence for it will appear. But the idea that 2 emperors and a pope got together and decided their golden era of rule was the turn of a millennium is all too plausible to me, especially because of my research into the gospels as fabrications. So don't move in to this fourth paradigm, just drop by from time to time and see if the view from the windows makes more or less sense of other things ;-)
"... drop by from time to time and see if the view from the windows makes more or less sense of other things." So eloquently stated - you have a wonderful way with words.
That Greenland rabbit hole looks fascinating. It is such a long time since I poked around with Lagrange multipliers.
Thank you, Julius. Here's what I wrote back to Joe:
"Just to check out the view from that window, I’m looking at the start of coinage in the Axial Age that David Graeber defines as 800 BCE to 600 BC. He says that Lydia in now Turkey first minted coins around 600 BCE. By 480 BCE there were at least 100 mints operating in Greek cities because they were used, not for external trade, but to pay mercenary soldiers, putting conquest on steroids.
"Could the Greek archons have accounted for the lead in Greenland ice for their smelting of silver into bars and then coins? Or were the archons created or usurped by whoever wrote the Torah, where these techniques of the Scythians are valorized? Was Imperial Rome really the Greek archons, mythologized, the way they took the actual mythology?
"I forget if Fomenko says there are almost 300 yrs missing or 700. The latter would put the invention of coinage around 100 CE to 220 to be widespread. Did it then fall into dormancy, rather than a plague?"
So I guess we are going to deconstruct the West until there is nothing left and we can all just cede the Nation to barbarians and rejoice in an eternal dark age year zero?
We can deconstruct the whole world - and should if it's a fiction with agenda to control - and realize that we have been cast in a limited light ourselves and in fact are not the helpless, authority-seeking beings we've told and taught to be.
As the world sheds, we shed the identities we took on to adjust to that messed up world. What are we minus those layers of 'false' identities. What is this world without the control wrapped around it?
I think this is what we're going to find out and that's incredibly positive.
One of my readers told me you and I give her hope and inspiration. You seem a good deal more optimistic than I am. The history of empires deconstructed is not a happy story for the children of empire. If Rome and Greece look opaque from here it is because they were followed by a dark age. There are no shortage of global barbarians eager to hear the lamentations of American women, and when I look at the liberal white women lining up for Kali-Ma, all I see are the children of empire.
Hi, William and thanks for responding. You write, "I think the best thing for America and the world right now would be the collapse of American empire, but lets not pretend that is not going to be very traumatic for most Americans." I agree with both of those statements and I don't think there's anything I can do about either. The ability to consume without producing is coming to an end with the petrodollar. And you have good reason to be optimistic about your own prospects, since you've been preparing for that, and realistic about how traumatic it will be for the majority--hence my State of DisUnion 2030 and how we might use that crisis for change that would be in the exact direction of your interests, including the ways I showed awhile back that would let us repurpose buildings and land for the community.
I don't really believe in optimism or pessimism, I want to know the reality in the world and of the world, as my socio-spiritual phrase describes. All of our ancestors were once settled in one place, indigenous to the land. The Royal Scyths and others under various names, represent conquest by bribing nomadic people into beheading those they invaded. They also then called the conquered 'barbarians' as I talk about in Babel because they didn't speak Greek. But they were the true 'barbarians' as I say in my book.
It's contradictory to believe in US empire with 800 military bases around the world and think that others invading us is wrong. I believe they're both wrong and I think you do too. What this evidence hints toward (if it's correct) is that people have been more successful in resisting empire and living off the land than they want us to know. It's barely been 1000 yrs that they've kept us in a feudal state, and even then with some empire hiccups. That would be good news, rather than the 3500 yrs that I chronicle in my book.
Optimism opens the field of possibility and calls in new, unimagined outcomes. Telling ourselves that history will repeat itself is the surest way to ensure that it does exactly that.
I am quite optimistic about my own prospects in a collapsing empire, I am not optimistic about American empire. I would not begrudge yours or Kathleen's optimism, I've merely been familiar with the current of optimistic Great Awakening theory for quite some time now, and I remain dubious as I see no real evidence of it.
I think the best thing for America and the world right now would be the collapse of American empire, but lets not pretend that is not going to be very traumatic for most Americans.
That said, I have long said, it is a most creative time for those with eyes wide open.
Agreed. Any path of evolution is not a comfortable one. And eyes, if they are truly wide open, will always necessitate discomfort. Thanks for your response, William!
I am very optimistic, though I don't think our road ahead is an easy one. My perspective includes large cycles of time, and so what looks like repeatable history, is actually a certain history (w/repeatable themes) coming to an end.
We can't imagine it. And if there were records of a time when humans were truly free, that was long ago eliminated or mythologized.
In certain circles of the Occult it is believed there will be seven periods of civilization building, of which we are in the fifth. We are mostly ignorant of the previous 4 periods. I know at least one Islamist on Substack who is quite certain the Djin are about to break through the veil and we will be in a very real spiritual war. He is also quite hungry to invade and take over America.
As to the imagination, that is the fundamental basis of magical practice, in conjunction with will the key to creativity.
There is not any question, we are absolutely influenced by the culture we are born in, this liberal, materialist modernity. Reality is not so narrow. That said, we are captive in a sense to mass assumptions about reality, and I don't expect that to change overly much, as economic prospects in and of America continue to decline.
Fascinating.
This truly is a time of shredding and so, our sense of history - how we mark time itself - is part of what's being undone. Oh, good!
"...that could change your entire understanding that the passage of time is an invention of the oligarchs, not just individual histories."
We don't know when stuff happened, what year it actually is (Clif HIgh has talked about this) our history let alone the world's or even the actual size of the earth. Are there two suns? (Some people have seen two.)
In other words we're in a mystery with stories, and those stories create a worldview that makes 'us' easier to manage and 'them' easier to stay in charge.
I don't think this is the first time an entire reality-reset has happened. Howdie Mickoski has done some good work on this and he posits that the worlds fairs and expositions are part of the 'how' they roll out new history narratives.
Thanks, Tereza.
I've been starting the Course again from the beginning of the text and it talks about how atOnement is the only tool that isn't double-edged and can't be used for destruction. We correct mistakes by moving forward in forgiveness but we're really moving backwards in time to our true state of atOnement, at which point time will have served its purpose and disappear.
I've continually had that sense. The more that I give people the benefit of the doubt, the more I find the history that confirms people are good and have wanted to just get along. It's a handful of people with bad ideas that convinced us otherwise.
It's interesting to think that the OG Psyops may have been a conspiracy of three people a little over 1000 yrs ago. It also reminds me of Jekyll Island when the Rothschilds and Rockefellers divvied up money, media, education and medicine between themselves.
Like my question into what happened in the world wars, I now expect that evidence will drop into my open hand, things that were in plain sight but invisible because I wasn't looking.
Very interesting about Clif High and about the world fairs. That makes perfect sense!
"...by moving forward in forgiveness but we're really moving backwards in time to our true state of atOnement."
I love that. Feels right. We're 'undoing' externally in the world and internally in ourselves and we end up where we always, really were.
"Like my question into what happened in the world wars, I now expect that evidence will drop into my open hand, things that were in plain sight but invisible because I wasn't looking."
Yes it is amazing how that works isn't it? Very much brings to mind 'As you seek so shall you find.'
And lately it happens faster and faster!
there is no way, history as is told us, could lead to where we are now. I think we should learn to access our ancestors memories.
Interesting concept, Artemis.
worth a try! at this point what is there to loose?
"History is bunk"
Henry Ford
Henry would know. I haven't yet ordered his two-volume writings but I'm interested. Certainly his perspective on the world wars, and who caused them, is something I've come around to.
I read Henry Ford's biography some years ago and did not take his comment seriously.
I thought he was just grandstanding.
However, having now read your Third Paradigm, something else comes to mind. When I was at grammar school in England from 1951 to 1958 everyone was required to take Religious Instruction 40 minutes per week that included reading some of the Old Testament. In one of the books, maybe Kings if I remember correctly, some of the notable Hebrews lived for hundreds of years. Of course I knew that this was impossible and wondered why this had entered the record. It now seems likely that the scribes had to find a way of making the data fit the calendar by increasing life spans.
The patriarchs would have been all BC or before the common era. I've read that their ages add up to some occult number, I forget the details. It's certainly a fiction.
Interesting stuff. Maybe you could retitle your substack as "Everything You Know is Wrong" (unless Firesign Theater has already trademarked that title).
Interesting exploration. My faith in history has continued to erode the past few years, though I'm uncertain exactly what fits where, yet.
That's exactly my feeling, Mathew! Welcome back from your conference. Very interesting developments going on out there.
Hi Tereza, I'm new to your page (and Substack for that matter). Still exploring both.
I like this article. In fact, I like articles, essays, etc. not becaues I agree with them, but, more importantly, because they direct attention to something worth thinking about and discussing. That's certainly the case here. Thanks!
What this article makes clear is that History is not about the past. Past events are inaccessible.
History is about documents (and artifacts) written, read, and interpreted in the present.
In short, History is about Interpretation. The interpretations of both the historian and the reader.
Of course, more is involved, a lot more. But that ought to be enough for a comment response.
Thanks again for this article. I look forward to reading more.
Oh and you made me realize I should have linked the first one I did on a book by Laurent: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/from-yahweh-to-zion. If curious.
Paul, how nice to be read by a (relative) Substack virgin ;-) Sometimes I get subs where I am their 375th and I can't help but wonder if they're bots or self-promoting, since no one can keep up with that. In this case, you've jumped in the deep end, I have to say.
And I share your criteria. I only read what has the power to change my mind about something that makes a difference, that matters. Glad this article met your criteria.
What an excellent point that History is about the present and is always an interpretation. My dogma, as I often say, is that people are inherently good and, when they behave badly, systems and stories are to blame. So my filter on what I read is scanning for evidence that false stories and the systems they validate have warped our view of human nature.
And I also claim my bias as 'a preferential option' for mothers. I see things from a mother's perspective and, while empires may be good for some and bad for others, they're never good for children as a whole.
Thanks for reading and responding, Paul!
«New Chronology» can be funny if one doesn't take it too seriously. ;)
«Romania» is clearly a 19th century invention, however. Also, the language was purposefully «re-latinized» (search: «re-Latinization of Romanian»).
Right, and that's exactly what Guyenot is addressing when he talks about the accepted theory for the commonality between Vulgar Latin, as it's termed, and Romanian. Sorry, I'm taking a dense book with 400 endnotes and giving the elevator pitch. The Byzantines called themselves Rhomaioi and Kaldellis, who I quoted, wrote Romanland: Ethnicity and Empire in Byzantium. He asserts they were referring to ancient Italian ethnicity.
But Laurent shows how 3 of Kaldellis' 8 examples illustrate the opposite. In one, people captured in the Balkans have children who inherit the genos of the Romans. In 1246, a people state they are pure Romans in their genos because they're from Philippopilis, Bulgaria today. In 867, people from around Constantinople are resettled in Italy and a 12th c history says that's why they have Roman customs to this day, unlike their neighbors. There are more.
I'm certainly not doing it justice. But it's a technique that is evident to me in my intensive study of the gospels--when writing a fiction, create your own corroborating sources with small differences of perspective. It's again what we've seen with the world wars. So extending that possibility to the first millennia isn't such a stretch.
Oh btw, in a discussion on apocalypso with Isaac Middle, I recommended the Mingo Crusaders, who I've listened to at least a dozen times since you recommended it: https://conspirat.substack.com/p/wef-world-entertainment-friday-week-fd7. I'm now making my way through the rest of the WEF World Entertainment Fridays. He subbed immediately!
Guyénot‘s work is really something. Thanks for posting.
I agree - fascinating. And why not?
History and the passage of time is as important to the idea of power and control as any other factor.
As I continue my own trauma work and the discovery of cracks in my perception of my life and history, I can see how it would be a relatively simple task to change "history" over the course of merely a few generations.
What an important correlation you bring up, Philip. Maybe, as in personal trauma, the first step to healing is seeing things as they actually happened. To do that requires suspending judgment of everyone concerned, and letting go of 'heroes' too. And then, maybe, it leaves room for seeing that everyone was doing the best they could but here is the thing (not the person) that prevented them from being able to do better. Let's change that thing.
WOW what a researcher Guyénot! His educational background definitely contributes to his fascinating research.
Also thanks to you and Nefahotep for trying to extract truth from an incredible web of lies.
Importance of trying to elucidate the truth of history of this region of the world, is of critical importance to understanding the true civilizational development of the Levant, Europe and Asia Minor (present day Turkey). This has a lot of relevance to current events in these regions and the shaping of the emerging civilizational world.
And now that I've finished with Guyenot, your book is up next, Fadi! Although I may need to intersperse it with something lighter since I just finished the three volume Poppy Wars. Although ostensibly fiction, they allegorize Chinese military history against the West in a way that is as utterly realistic and depressing as anything I've read. I may do an episode on them.
Agreed on elucidating the truth of the history of this region of the world. I loved that first quote of Laurent's on the global conquest of chronologies and their homogenization. Other cultures and languages are where the real history wouldn't have been entirely erased. I even wonder if that effects The Poppy Wars. Although completely anti-imperial, it conveys an inevitability of the 'Hesperians,' as she calls them, winning because they're centuries ahead in technology. But maybe not. Laurent shows that Western history gives that impression by artificially inflating Western chronology while China stands relatively still--in ways that make no sense. So the defeatism--even wondering if Hesperians really are superior--seeps into even an anti-imperial hyper-realistic fiction.
Thank you, again, for reading and adding your knowledge to my thread, Fadi.
WOW I am amazed by your readings!
Quote: "Although completely anti-imperial, it conveys an inevitability of the 'Hesperians,' as she calls them, winning because they're centuries ahead in technology. But maybe not.
Not. You will realize this when you read Why The West Can't win. Not only are the Chinese ahead in all spheres including technology, but also the Persians (Iran) and the Orthodox (Russia).
I'm very much enjoying the intro and first chapter on the historical perspective. Very interesting patterns on % of population vs. % of GDP and the rise of colonization in different areas. And great comparison of China and India as real independence through military victory vs economic colonization. Yes, the 'Gandhification' of India, to take the victory away from the militants and make it into a colonial concession, was definitely a ploy.
And when my book does arrive via your son, you'll see that I also write about the 'CFA francenstein.' It was a complete shock to realize that 14 Africans countries are forced to deposit 85% of their foreign exchange earnings in the French treasury, where the Paris bourse invests it for their own interests. And those countries need to borrow their own money back at interest, which can't exceed 20% of public revenues, while France determines the exchange rate. How do we not know this?
To your list of African leaders with alternative currencies, who were assassinated, I'd add Qaddafi and Laurent Gbagbo, President of the Cote d'Ivoire, and the pan-African dinar.
Looking forward to more!
WOW not only are you a prodigious reader, you go into depth into the material!
Good news, I will receive your book this Saturday :-)
This is fascinating. I have been learning about old world buildings, and through that the possibility of huge swaths of history being completely fraudulent and made up. Time is such a slippery and malleable thing. I am going to find this book.
Thank you, Betsy. Oooh, "Time is such a slippery and malleable thing" what a great phrase!
I'm looking for more books questioning the chronology we have been given of the history of humanity. I wonder if you have any suggestions re: Diacu's The Lost Millennium, Worlds in Collision or other work by Immanuel Velikovsky, anything by Anatoly Fomenko, etc. These seem to be central names in suggesting that a lot of the history we think is real has been made up by various people for various reasons. I am finding the whole notion utterly fascinating and I thank you for bringing it up!
My suggestion would be that you start with Anno Domini and go deeper into his 400 endnotes from there. He really gives a very succinct summary, which I'm not doing justice to. Each of the chapters will have rabbit holes, so you can take your pick. So glad I've been able to introduce you to this and I'll be learning from you next time. I don't know the other books but they sound intriguing, and I look forward to learning about them from you.
Thanks! Excellent advice. I will let you know what I learn!
Yes, I would agree that there is much about The Church of Rome, the city of Rome, the Latin language and the chronologies and histories that suggests fakery and forgery.
Roman Catholicism seems to be a re-branding of Mithraism with added Christian bits to create an effective control mechanism that could hold the Roman Empire together much more cheaply than could a military machine.
According to the Ancient British histories, Constantine The Great’s mother was the British Princess Helen, who married Emperor Constantine Chlorus, who ruled the Western Empire from Britain (Italy was - as you say - in a state of anarchy). Helen, daughter of King Coel Godebog (Old King Cole, the merry old soul of the nursery rhyme), was of The Third Holy Family of Britain, making Constantine also a descendant of The Holy Family. He was raised an Apostolic British Christian; so his beliefs would have been more Gnostic or Cathar than Mithraic/Pauline. Constantine Chlorus appointed the leading Christian scholar of the day, Lactantius, as the young Constantine The Great’s tutor.
That Constantine The Great did not become a Christian until later in life is just one of the many lies told by The Church of Rome. British kings liked to wait until they were old before being baptised so that the baptism would wash away their sins, leaving them relatively pure and ready to enter heaven. After baptism, they would often abdicate and spend their last years in a monastery to avoid having any more blood on their hands, and so on.
Incidentally, another lie told by Rome is that Saint Peter was the first Bishop of Rome. In fact, there is no evidence that Peter was ever in Rome. Christianity actually arrived in Rome from Britain in AD 51, when the Romans captured the Christian British King Caradoc I and his family and took them to Rome in triumph. The first Bishop of Rome was actually Caradoc’s son, Linus.
You point a finger at the Medicis. I think you are right to do so. You also mention Fomenko. His work very much agrees with that of the British forensic historians, Wilson and Blackett:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYJt06yQ3Bo
Here’s a view of Gibbon’s “Decline And Fall of The Roman Empire”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-6Zjav6XxA&t=4625s
As for the Scythians, you may recall that Andrew Power wrote a lot about them in “Ireland, Land of The Pharaohs.” He says they were Aryans, so Iranian/Persian would make sense - survivors of Atlantis’s cataclysm. As some of the Cimmerians became the Ancient British/Welsh, so some of the Scythians became the Scots and Irish.
Adrian Gilbert points us (at 53:20) to Ancient Persian stone reliefs that tell us that the Scythians, like the Cimmerians/Khumry, were Israelites, descendants of the so-called “Lost” Tribes of Israel; so similarities with the Habiru/Hebrews should be expected:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik3pC_6ZJX0&list=WL&index=3
As for Latin, many scholars have noted the similarities between it and Hebrew and Coelbren/Ancient British/Welsh. Welsh is one of the oldest living languages in the world - if not the oldest - tracing its origins back though Ancient Assyria to Ancient Egypt:
https://www.youtube.com/@BritainsHiddenHistoryRoss/search?query=latin
As always, Tirion, you bring so much to chew on. If I could, I'd like to step backward and see if I can phrase our underlying hypotheses, what we're gathering evidence for. This, of course, is just a draft for yours, a guess based on what I remember, which may not be correct.
You (perhaps): Empire (some ruling over others) is divinely ordained and Jesus was born into a royal family and his descendants are divinely ordained to rule. What's been misconstrued is who that should be, through the manipulation of religion and history. The Scythians (who, yes, I do remember from Andrew Power) brought advanced development and knowledge everywhere they went, which is why they ended up ruling as tall stature, blond or red-headed kings and queens. They may be a different race or even descendants from a different planet.
Me: The concept of empire (rule by foreign rulers or some over others, not self rule) is what keeps us from solving our own problems. Empire is the opposite of the rule of God, to whom all are equally beloved. Empire was established in three autonomous regions, as Frances Leader writes: economic control in the City of London, theocratic control in the Vatican and military control from Wash DC. Those wielding these three tools have changed names but can be identified throughout history and modernity because they use conquest--taking over other people's lands and setting themselves up as rulers or the power behind the rulers. Identifying the means by which this is done is my purpose, and then looking at the people as secondary.
There's more I want to say but I need to go soon, and maybe it would be good to check in with you on this first anyway. What are your thoughts?
Tereza, I'm not trying to gather evidence to support any hypothesis. I'm trying to establish the truth about life, the universe and everything. Anyway, thanks for your time.
You know I respect you, Tirion, I'm not trying to offend. Everyone who does research has a hypothesis they're honing. The material you could read is functionally infinite--you have to choose based on your interests. In any field of study, there's a myriad of choices. I think we all have a dogma, a bias and one hypothesis at least. My dogma is that people are inherently equally moral, and my bias is for mothers. My hypotheses are open to change based on the evidence I find, but not in ways that contradict my dogma. I see things from the perspective of my bias, which isn't a bad thing. It's necessary to know what experience you bring and claim it.
The phrase 'holy royal family' conveys a divine right of kings, doesn't it? That there are people who are born to rule over others? So your worldview includes that possibility, yes? You're one of the best-read people I know and always bring salient points and references. I was just clarifying that our hypotheses, I think, differ.
Oh, I’m putting that book on my queue. Absolutely fascinating!
Everything I’ve learned about the Roman’s has been from I, Claudius. 😆 but yes, we (Balkan folk) have always wondered why Romania doesn’t have a Slav language or a Cyrillic alphabet. And why the Roma people were nomadic when clearly their look and language closely resembled Persian ancestry. I’m also realizing I might have been mispronouncing “Caucuses” all my life. I thought the accent was on the first syllable. Oops.
Now, I listened to this while walking my dog and I made a mental note to slide in your comments to add my three cents (inflation) in regards to Konstantin, but then you got a vocal laugh out of me when you mentioned my name as if you knew what I was thinking and it totally startled my fur baby.
Oh don't take your pronunciation cues from me! I was realizing how many names I'd only read and never heard spoken while I was recording it. Caucuses was one but there were many more I was shaky on but proceeding as if I knew--like Trajan.
Yes, the Roma people completely came to mind for me too. Where do they fit in? This whole area around Constantinople is a complete mystery to me and now it turns out that it's the true cradle of civilization. Please add your three cents, and I'll even go you four, on Konstantin.
I don’t remember all that much. But the fact that Constantinople (modern day Istanbul) was the Roman capital during his reign and that he was sympathetic to Christianity (I think I remember him being baptized by an Orthodox priest, might be wrong) points to his roots being either Byzantium or Greek.
I am not quite ready to move to this fourth paradigm with Laurent Guyénot when I haven’t even grasped the first, second and THIRD paradigms of history. I’ll now have to read/listen to (amongst others) “The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides” and see where that fits
https://odysee.com/@JustAudiobooks:0/History-of-the-Peloponnesian-War-Pt-1of7:7
Henry Ford’s “two-volume writings” (actually written by his research staff but under his editorial guidance) is a must
https://www.moneytreepublishing.com/shop/the-international-jew
I have just been reorganising my bookshelves to fit these in. In the meantime, I do like the support of complementary audio readings.
Reading by Alex Linder here
https://vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=322681
Thanks for those excellent suggestions Julius! I have my other books from Money Tree in the queue to read also: Hellstorm and The Myth of German Villainy and the 6 Million: Fact or Fiction? But I should likely order those now because who knows when access might be cut off?
Joe Atwill sent me a link to a paper he's referenced "in a lengthy debate concerning Formenko's dating system. The Greenland ice sheets are the best clock we have and they clearly show the Roman imperial era was 2,000 years ago. While I am not a fan of AD, the data shows it is more less correct."
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1721818115
I haven't responded yet but what strikes me is that the Greenland ice sheets wouldn't have recorded the names of who was doing what. Or whether it was being done under conquest and exploitation or industrial progress and development. Would it show whether the mining pollution was coming from Rome or Byzantium? I'd need to read the paper further.
With this idea, like all new ideas, I'm holding it lightly in the back of my mind. If it's true, I think that more evidence for it will appear. But the idea that 2 emperors and a pope got together and decided their golden era of rule was the turn of a millennium is all too plausible to me, especially because of my research into the gospels as fabrications. So don't move in to this fourth paradigm, just drop by from time to time and see if the view from the windows makes more or less sense of other things ;-)
"... drop by from time to time and see if the view from the windows makes more or less sense of other things." So eloquently stated - you have a wonderful way with words.
That Greenland rabbit hole looks fascinating. It is such a long time since I poked around with Lagrange multipliers.
Thank you, Julius. Here's what I wrote back to Joe:
"Just to check out the view from that window, I’m looking at the start of coinage in the Axial Age that David Graeber defines as 800 BCE to 600 BC. He says that Lydia in now Turkey first minted coins around 600 BCE. By 480 BCE there were at least 100 mints operating in Greek cities because they were used, not for external trade, but to pay mercenary soldiers, putting conquest on steroids.
"Could the Greek archons have accounted for the lead in Greenland ice for their smelting of silver into bars and then coins? Or were the archons created or usurped by whoever wrote the Torah, where these techniques of the Scythians are valorized? Was Imperial Rome really the Greek archons, mythologized, the way they took the actual mythology?
"I forget if Fomenko says there are almost 300 yrs missing or 700. The latter would put the invention of coinage around 100 CE to 220 to be widespread. Did it then fall into dormancy, rather than a plague?"
Possible or not? I’m just speculating.
So I guess we are going to deconstruct the West until there is nothing left and we can all just cede the Nation to barbarians and rejoice in an eternal dark age year zero?
That's hardly the only option though right?
We can deconstruct the whole world - and should if it's a fiction with agenda to control - and realize that we have been cast in a limited light ourselves and in fact are not the helpless, authority-seeking beings we've told and taught to be.
As the world sheds, we shed the identities we took on to adjust to that messed up world. What are we minus those layers of 'false' identities. What is this world without the control wrapped around it?
I think this is what we're going to find out and that's incredibly positive.
One of my readers told me you and I give her hope and inspiration. You seem a good deal more optimistic than I am. The history of empires deconstructed is not a happy story for the children of empire. If Rome and Greece look opaque from here it is because they were followed by a dark age. There are no shortage of global barbarians eager to hear the lamentations of American women, and when I look at the liberal white women lining up for Kali-Ma, all I see are the children of empire.
Hi, William and thanks for responding. You write, "I think the best thing for America and the world right now would be the collapse of American empire, but lets not pretend that is not going to be very traumatic for most Americans." I agree with both of those statements and I don't think there's anything I can do about either. The ability to consume without producing is coming to an end with the petrodollar. And you have good reason to be optimistic about your own prospects, since you've been preparing for that, and realistic about how traumatic it will be for the majority--hence my State of DisUnion 2030 and how we might use that crisis for change that would be in the exact direction of your interests, including the ways I showed awhile back that would let us repurpose buildings and land for the community.
I don't really believe in optimism or pessimism, I want to know the reality in the world and of the world, as my socio-spiritual phrase describes. All of our ancestors were once settled in one place, indigenous to the land. The Royal Scyths and others under various names, represent conquest by bribing nomadic people into beheading those they invaded. They also then called the conquered 'barbarians' as I talk about in Babel because they didn't speak Greek. But they were the true 'barbarians' as I say in my book.
It's contradictory to believe in US empire with 800 military bases around the world and think that others invading us is wrong. I believe they're both wrong and I think you do too. What this evidence hints toward (if it's correct) is that people have been more successful in resisting empire and living off the land than they want us to know. It's barely been 1000 yrs that they've kept us in a feudal state, and even then with some empire hiccups. That would be good news, rather than the 3500 yrs that I chronicle in my book.
Optimism opens the field of possibility and calls in new, unimagined outcomes. Telling ourselves that history will repeat itself is the surest way to ensure that it does exactly that.
I am quite optimistic about my own prospects in a collapsing empire, I am not optimistic about American empire. I would not begrudge yours or Kathleen's optimism, I've merely been familiar with the current of optimistic Great Awakening theory for quite some time now, and I remain dubious as I see no real evidence of it.
I think the best thing for America and the world right now would be the collapse of American empire, but lets not pretend that is not going to be very traumatic for most Americans.
That said, I have long said, it is a most creative time for those with eyes wide open.
Agreed. Any path of evolution is not a comfortable one. And eyes, if they are truly wide open, will always necessitate discomfort. Thanks for your response, William!
I am very optimistic, though I don't think our road ahead is an easy one. My perspective includes large cycles of time, and so what looks like repeatable history, is actually a certain history (w/repeatable themes) coming to an end.
We can't imagine it. And if there were records of a time when humans were truly free, that was long ago eliminated or mythologized.
Our very imaginations were captured.
https://devanneykathleen.substack.com/p/captured-imagination
In certain circles of the Occult it is believed there will be seven periods of civilization building, of which we are in the fifth. We are mostly ignorant of the previous 4 periods. I know at least one Islamist on Substack who is quite certain the Djin are about to break through the veil and we will be in a very real spiritual war. He is also quite hungry to invade and take over America.
As to the imagination, that is the fundamental basis of magical practice, in conjunction with will the key to creativity.
There is not any question, we are absolutely influenced by the culture we are born in, this liberal, materialist modernity. Reality is not so narrow. That said, we are captive in a sense to mass assumptions about reality, and I don't expect that to change overly much, as economic prospects in and of America continue to decline.