Phantom time hypothesis

[Sentenza]

Phantom time hypothesis is a theory developed by Heribert Illig (born 1947 in Vohenstrauß) in 1991, which suggests that the Early Middle Ages (more precisely, the period 614–911 AD) never occurred, meaning that all artifacts attributed to this time period are from other times and that all historical figures from this time period are outright fabrications.

Others who have written essays in support of the phantom time hypothesis include Hans-Ulrich Niemitz, Christoph Marx, Angelika Müller, Uwe Topper and Manfred Zeller. The vast majority of historians believe this theory to be wrong.

Claims

The basis of Illig's claims is the paucity of archaeological evidence that can be reliably dated to this period; perceived inadequacies of radiometric and dendrochronological methods of dating this period, and 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 Charles the Great, is a forgery of medieval chroniclers, more precisely a conspiracy instigated by Otto III and Gerbert d'Aurillac.

The theory also stems from the belief that during the introduction of the Gregorian calendar in Europe (1582 AD), while compensating for a ten day discrepancy in the old Julian calendar, many dates were falsely (or ineptly) recalculated as the new system created a thirteen day discrepancy. The original mathematical blemish was attributed to the Julian year being 1.3 minutes too long (which is commonly agreed[clarify] as factual).

[Sentenza]

^^So basically this theory say we are in the year 1711 AD and not 2007....

[MiChuhSuh]

what Eurocentric stupidity. I'm gonna make sure that this is actually what they believe, but if it is how stupidly Euro-centric can they be? Because shit in Europe wasn't changing as much, that means the rest of the world was just sitting on their asses too? So I guess Muslims never took over Mecca and Muhammad never died, huh?

This is just as bad as the the Vinci Code, acting as if Christianity didn't start in Israel and as if the first Christian nation wasn't Ethiopia, but was always a European thing which the almighty European churches dominated

[justice league]

Both you guys are confusing Christianity and Catholicism....

[Sentenza]

what Eurocentric stupidity. I'm gonna make sure that this is actually what they believe, but if it is how stupidly Euro-centric can they be? Because shit in Europe wasn't changing as much, that means the rest of the world was just sitting on their asses too? So I guess Muslims never took over Mecca and Muhammad never died, huh?

This is just as bad as the the Vinci Code, acting as if Christianity didn't start in Israel and as if the first Christian nation wasn't Ethiopia, but was always a European thing which the almighty European churches dominated

Yea thats funny huh? Muslims and other Asian cultures didnt exist at that time and took a break for 300 years.
That theres is a lack of archeological evidence and written stuff out of that time, is just because, well there was not much going on in europe at that time. Thats why its called the dark ages.
They were technologically and culturally a step back compared to the roman times. The Romans and Greeks had Canalizations and aqueducts and people in the middle ages got their water from wells again and shitted into the ditches, cause they didnt know how to use that stuff.

[Sentenza]

Both you guys are confusing Christianity and Catholicism....

Yea ok thats true, but that time was before the schism of the Church in 1054 and Catholicism made up probably 95% of Christianity.
Or lets say it was healthier for you to be a catholic

[justice league]

Both you guys are confusing Christianity and Catholicism....

Yea ok thats true, but that time was before the schism of the Church in 1054 and Catholicism made up probably 95% of Christianity.
Or lets say it was healthier for you to be a catholic

I shudder to think,,,

[Tre]

I don't personally buy into it... but it is damn fascinating!

[Sentenza]

I don't personally buy into it... but it is damn fascinating!

Yea the theory is flawed but interesting. They say emperor Otto III. wanted desperately to be the emperor during times of the millenium change in 1000 AD and therefore skipped about 200 years of history, by making up stuff.
But as i said, arabic and asian timelines have consistently covered that era so it cant be true in my eyes.

[alexalonso]

It sounds like a far fetched hypothesis, i wonder what his motivation for this theory was?

[Sentenza]

It sounds like a far fetched hypothesis, i wonder what his motivation for this theory was?

The motivation was, that Otto III. wanted to be the ruler of the changing of the millenium in 1000AD which was believed to be the end of the world.
It was a mass hysteria in all of europe and he probably thought it would give him all kinds of advantages and a special page in the history books.