The Cock-Up of the 3rd Century

Getting to grips with a reconciliation error is usually a laborious exercise that involves critically examining the data, identifying errors and [very occasionally] discovering malfeasance.

However, reconciling a 60 Year Discrepancy in Roman history is another story altogether.

60 Year Discrepancy
The mainstream Gorsium Ceramic Chronology suggests the catastrophic events associated with the Heinsohn Horizon abruptly terminated in 240 AD.

A revisionist chronology based upon Leona Libby’s Old Japanese Cedar Chronology and the floating Glen Turret Fan Chronology places the Heinsohn Horizon at 912 CE.

Aligning these chronologies indicates 200 AD lines up with 912 CE.

This suggests the Gorsium Ceramic Chronology is misdating the Heinsohn Horizon by 40 years.

Furthermore, the Gorsium Ceramic Chronology terminates with a curious single object entry that covers the 20 year period between 240 and 260 AD.

Therefore, overall, it appears the Gorsium Ceramic Chronology has mistakenly been extended by 60 years between 200 AD and 260 AD.

More information: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/marcomannia/

Unravelling this 60 Year Discrepancy begins by understanding the Gorsium Ceramic Chronology is based upon the established mainstream dating of “coins and samian ware”.

The events of the Marcomannic wars were indicated by destruction-levels dated by coins and samian ware.

Die Archäologischen Evidenzen Der Markomannisch-Sarmatischen Kriege (166 – 180 N. Chr.) In Den Donaupovinzen – Dénes Gabler
Studijné Zvesti Archeologického Ústavu Sav 61 – 2017 – 21-40

http://archeol.sav.sk/files/03_Gabler.pdf

Furthermore, the 260 AD end date for the Gorsium Ceramic Chronology appears to have been determined by the dating of a Roman coin to 258 AD.

Google Translation

Gorsium-Herculia is one of Hungary ‘s most important Roman areas.

In 258, the city council’s treasury was dumped underground under the threat of a fast-paced civil war.

https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorsium

Therefore, at this juncture, the reconciliation error can be redefined as:

It appears the established mainstream Roman Chronology has mistakenly been extended by 60 years between 200 and 260 AD.

The suspect 200-260 AD period is part of the Crisis of the Third Century when the “Roman Empire nearly collapsed”.

The Crisis of the Third Century, also known as Military Anarchy or the Imperial Crisis (AD 235–284), was a period in which the Roman Empire nearly collapsed under the combined pressures of invasion, civil war, plague, and economic depression.

The crisis began with the assassination of Emperor Severus Alexander by his own troops in 235, initiating a 50-year period during which there were at least 26 claimants to the title of emperor, mostly prominent Roman army generals, who assumed imperial power over all or part of the Empire.

The same number of men became accepted by the Roman Senate as emperor during this period and so became legitimate emperors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century

During the Crisis of the Third Century the Roman Empire appears to have been extremely careless with the life expectancy of it’s Emperors.

On the other hand:

The life expectancy data suggests the compilers of the mainstream Roman Chronology merged two completely different sets of data during the 3rd and 4th centuries.

This is particularly relevant to the Roman Coin Chronology because beyond Rome there were “over 600” provincial mints producing coins in silver, billon and bronze.

Roman provincial currency was coinage minted within the Roman Empire by local civic rather than imperial authorities.

Provincial coins were issued in silver, billon and bronze denominations, though never gold. The majority were bronze. Silver and billon coins were more common in the Eastern regions of the Empire, particularly Alexandria.

In general, the issuance of silver coinage was controlled by Rome.
That gave the imperial government a measure of control and influence throughout the empire.

There were over 600 provincial mints during the Imperial Era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_provincial_currency

Roman coins have helped “fill up gaps” in the historical narrative.

On the other hand:

Coins that contradict “historical fact” are discreetly dropped down the back of the sofa.

In their historical aspect the coins of the Roman Empire present three phases of interest :

(i) As contemporary monuments the coins supply corroborative evidence of facts which are recorded by historians.

(2) In a number of instances the coins fill up gaps in the narrative and supply information, which historians have omitted, or which, for some reason, has been lost.

(3) There are examples of coins which make statements contrary to what is known to be historical fact. Such coins must be regarded as having been struck in anticipation of events which were expected, or hoped for, but not actually accomplished.

The first essential in drawing historical conclusions is to have an accurate chronology.
The arrangement of the Roman Imperial series in chronological order has been attempted by numerous writers such as Occo, Eckhel and Hobler, not to mention more recent Numismatists, and the attempt has been, and indeed must be, fraught with considerable difficulty.

Coins of the Roman Empire – Edward Allen Sydenham – 1917
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029779943#page/n16/mode/1up

For example:

The reappearance of the ROMA mint mark in the 4th century suggests there are errors in the official Roman Chronology between 361 and 378 AD.

https://www.tesorillo.com/aes/_cec/cecas1.htm

The implications of an error in the Roman Chronology between 361 and 378 AD are very significant for the dating of [for example] the Dark Earth in London, Anglo-Saxon pit-huts at Sutton Courtenay and the Alexandrian tsunami of 365 AD.

Valentinian I… was Roman emperor from 364 to 375.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinian_I

Pottery from the deposits beneath it ranged through the second century, and from the clay and burnt material above it came a coin of the house of Valentinian (A.D. 360 or later); so that this version of the road belonged to a late phase of the Roman city.

The Excavation of Roman and Mediaeval London – W. F. Grimes – 1968
See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/02/22/dating-the-dark-earth-the-cheapside-valentinian/

While this usurper [Procopius] yet lived, whose various deeds and whose death I have described, on 21 July in the year in which Valentinian was consul for the first time with his brother… Ammianus Marcellinus 26.10.15-19

Ammianus and The Great Tsunami – Gavin Kelly [Peterhouse, Cambridge]
The Journal of Roman Studies – Vol. 94 – 2004
https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/12/03/the-heinsohn-horizon-21st-july-912/

Valentinian II… was Roman Emperor from AD 375 to 392.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinian_II

Perhaps Edward Thurlow Leeds would have found dating Sutton Courtenay a lot easier if he had remembered to find the regulation “coin of the house of Valentinian” amongst the sand and gravel.

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/03/10/sutton-courtney-and-the-saxon-swamp/

Chronology errors in the mainstream Roman Chronology would explain why the “most radical” of the 300 year “repeaters” is also associated with restoring old coinage standards.

Diocletian… was a Roman emperor from 284 to 305.

Diocletian restored the three-metal coinage and issued better quality pieces.
The new system consisted of five coins: the aureus/solidus, a gold coin weighing, like its predecessors, one-sixtieth of a pound;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diocletian

Diocletian is seen as the most radical of all the Late Antiquity repeaters of everything 300 years out of fashion.

Rome’s Imperial Stratigraphy Belongs To The 8th-10th Century Period
Q-Mag – Gunnar Heinsohn – 22 June 2014

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2017/05/29/ravenna-revisited-triple-point/

Chronology errors in the Roman Chronology would also explain why Chilerich [excavated in 1655] appears to have “lived in the 2nd and 5th centuries at the same time”.

Childerich (+482), the father of Clovis, became immortal because a leather wallet found on his entombed body contained not only, as expected, coins of Late Antiquity, but also many pieces from Imperial Antiquity.

Childerich seems to have lived in the 2nd and 5th centuries at the same time.

Siegfried Found: Decoding The Nibelungen Period
Gunnar Heinsohn – February 2018

http://www.q-mag.org/_iserv/dlfiles/dl.php?ddl=q-mag-gunnar-siegfried-021818.pdf

Back to the Carelessness of the 3rd Century.

More specifically, the tumultuous Year of the Six Emperors.

The Year of the Six Emperors was the year AD 238, during which six people were recognised as emperors of Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_of_the_Six_Emperors

This turbulent period [when the “Roman Empire nearly collapsed”] marks the point where the credibility of the mainstream narrative collapses.

For example:

The touching [but very questionable] narrative of the father and son who were coerced into becoming joint Emperors for “about forty-five days” [as narrated in 1889].

GORDIANUS I. (Marcus Antonins) Africanus senior, was the issue of an illustrious family. His father was Metius Marulus, his mother Ulpia Gordiaua.

He was born about the year of Rome 940 (A. D. 157).

Of a mild, just, and munificent disposition, correct in morals and dignified in manners ; well versed in the higher branches of literature, loving and cultivating both eloquence and poetry, he soon obtained public offices, and displayed his virtues and moderation in a remarkable manner.
His edileship was a splendid one ; for the riches of his family enabled him to serve that ruinously expensive magistrature with great brilliancy.

In 966 (A. D. 213), he was consul for the first time.
In 982 (A. D. 229), his second consulate was in colleagueship with the Emperor Alexander Severus, replacing in the middle of the year Dion Cassius, the historian.

The emperor sent Gordian into Africa, as proconsul, and appointed his son to be his lieutenant.
In that province lie won, as governor, the affection of the governed – and this popularity proved at once glorious and fatal to him.

991 (A. D. 238). – A procurator (commissioner) of Maximinus arriving in Africa, and having by his exactions exasperated the people, was killed by some young nobles.
These rash men, to escape the anger of the Thracian savage, who would have been sure to avenge the death of his officers in a cruel manner, compelled Gordian, then 80 years of age, and who was at the moment at Thysdras, to accept the empire, which they also decreed to his son. This choice of the army and province was approved by the Senate and by the whole city of Rome, who detested Maximinus on account of his ferocious tyranny.
A senatus consultum proclaimed the deposition of Maximinus, and the accession of the two Gordians.

The new Augusti did not long enjoy the honours of imperial sovereignty.

Capellianus, governor of Mauretania, enraged against Gordian, the father, who had superseded him in that lieutenancy, marched upon Carthage with a numerous army. On receiving this intelligence, the elder Gordian, under the desponding impression, that he should not be able to resist so vast a multitude of assailants, put an end to his life by strangulation. His son was slain in the conflict which took place when the partizans of Capellianus entered Carthage.

Thus perished both father and son, after having jointly held the supreme power about forty-five days.

The Senate in token of its regrets placed the two Augusti in the rank of the gods.

Gordian senior had married Fabia Orestilla, great grand-daughter of Antoninus Pius, by whom he had Gordian, afterwards his associate in the empire, and Metia Faustina, wife of Junius Balbus, a consular personage.

A Dictionary of Roman Coins – Seth William Stevenson – 1889
https://archive.org/stream/dictionaryofroma00stev#page/433/mode/1up

In the modern version of the story, their reign is reduced to “only 21 days” even though this dynamic duo died just 10 days after their senate confirmation.

Gordian I
Born c. 159
Died 12 April 238 (aged 79)

Gordian, after protesting that he was too old for the position, eventually yielded to the popular clamour and assumed both the purple and the cognomen Africanus on 22 March.

The senate confirmed the new emperor on 2 April and many of the provinces gladly sided with Gordian.

The Gordians had reigned only 21 days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordian_I
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordian_II

A remarkable aspect of this dynamic duo is that they appear [individually] on Roman coins.

During the troubled months of the first half of the year 238, coins were struck bearing the portraits of all the short lived Emperors; but as may be expected, the coins contain but scanty references to the turmoil of civil strife.

Since the Gordians were both signally defeated by Capellianus at the opening of hostilities there was no semblance of a victory to be attributed to them.

The above coins must therefore have been struck in anticipation by their adherents in Africa.

Coins of the Roman Empire – Edward Allen Sydenham – 1917
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924029779943#page/n148/mode/1up

Another remarkable aspect of the Gordian I and Gordian II coins is that the portraits could be of the same person – a person who [simply] held office twice.

Such basic errors would explain why Gordian I coins were minted in Rome and Alexandria.

Chronology errors would explain why the fineness of Roman coins dramatically oscillates in the 3rd century.

Via: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denarius

Chronology errors would explain why there are replicated series of Roman coins in the 3rd century.

And chronology errors would explain why the mainstream Roman Chronology has been erroneously extended by 60 years between 200 and 260 AD.

Overall, the evidence suggests the Crisis of the Third Century [when the “Roman Empire nearly collapsed”] was cobbled together [in a vain attempt] to mask the catastrophic events associated with the Heinsohn Horizon [when the Roman Empire really collapsed].

First, and foremost, this combine chronology provides support for Gunnar Heinsohn’s 700 Phantom Year hypothesis by aligning 200 AD with 912 CE

See: https://malagabay.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/marcomannia/

Coins Found at Wroxeter

It is a frequent subject of wonder why, whenever we dig upon a Roman site, we almost invariably find the Roman money scattered about everywhere.

This is eminently the case at Wroxeter, where, for centuries the Roman coins have been picked up in abundance by the peasantry, who gave them the local name of dinders, which represents the Anglo-Norman denier, and the Latin denarius.

The word itself is a proof of the length of time during which it has been customary to pick up the Roman coins here, for no doubt it was derived from the Anglo-Norman language, when that language was commonly talked on our border.

Uriconium – Thomas Wright – 1872
https://archive.org/stream/cu31924027950264#page/n354/mode/1up

Advertisements
Gallery | This entry was posted in Books, Catastrophism, Dark Earth, Heinsohn Horizon, History, Ravenna Revisited, Roman Chronology, Uniformitarianism, Wroxeter Chronicles. Bookmark the permalink.