Gunnar Heinsohn: Comments on 300 Year Repeaters

Please find below my comments on the 300 year “repeaters” referred to in The Cock-Up of the 3rd Century and Roman Chronology: Crime Scene Reconstruction.


My claim that, during the 8th-10th century CE, Imperial Antiquity (1st-3rd c. CE), Late Antiquity (4th-6th c.) and the Early Middle Ages (8th-10th c. CE) run side by side, is stratigraphically justified.

That parallelism allows the reconnection of artificially separated sources resulting in more complete historical narratives.

I want to illustrate this recombination of sources by two examples.

(1) I compare two Jewish-Roman wars of the 1st/2nd and 4th/5th centuries, which lasted about 70 years. Though some 300 years apart, they are fought by the same legions.
However, wars and legions have material evidence only for one of the two periods.

(2) I also compare Roman wars from Scotland to the Balkans in the late 1st and late 4th centuries CE.

The reader will decide for himself whether the similarities over 300 years may be explained by chance alone.

Gunnar Heinsohn

Click here for the PDF version.

Gallery | This entry was posted in Guest Authors, Heinsohn Horizon, History, Roman Chronology. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Gunnar Heinsohn: Comments on 300 Year Repeaters

  1. malagabay says:

    I guess the Doppelgänger Diarists must have had some fun manufacturing
    the 300 Year Repeaters.

    However, their job required a lot of self-discipline because every dodgy detail added to the dossier was an additional hostage to fortune that can be discredited.

    It’s an old art form that’s still very popular in modern times.

    It seems the defining traits of the 300 Year Repeaters narratives are:

    a) Blurred and incomplete information [when compared to the original story].
    b) Heroic personalities that have appeared on a coin [with no date].
    c) Vague villains.

    Unfortunately, many of those attributes also apply to the original narratives.

    It’s like trying to distinguish between:

    a) The original broadcast episode of a television soap opera.
    b) The shorter edited highlights version that’s repeated at a later date.

    Neither version is necessarily based upon reality.

  2. calgacus says:

    What about the Samaritan revolts (standard chronology 484-572AD)? There is also the Jewish revolt against Heraclius (614-625). We already know that in the wars from the 1st and 2nd century there were many sects that belonged to what we call “Judaism”. The Samaritans seem to be people belonging to one of these sects (Karaite Judaism is another branch that survived in modern times).

  3. Martin Sieff says:

    Gunnar You still have not uttered a word on the enormous excavation of Anglo-Saxon London over the past 20 years.

    Nor explained why there is not the slightest hint of interaction between the Byzantine and Classical Roman Empires that you claim to be simultaneous.

    Or the ludicrous conclusion on your chronology on how Constantine the Great’s father can be a Roman sub-Emperor in Britain well before Claudius conquered Britain.

    Or why the Christian 4th century and later Empire and the classical Pagan 1st century Empire seem blissfully unaware of each other ex other’s simultaneous existence.
    There are hundreds more such problems your scheme generates. But it would be a good start to address these ones.

    Philip K Dick said reality is what goes on existing (we might add, in the past as well as in the present) whether you believe in it or not.

    And the Jews kept rebelling against the Romans, just as the Irish did against the English and the Poles against the Russians.

    Surely Queen Elizabeth I never existed and the Army she sent to Ireland as the Special Air Service and paratroopers that Queen Elizabeth II deployed to Ireland 400 years later.

    • Gunnar Heinsohn says:

      Dear Martin:
      A few words regarding your statement that I give “not the slightest hint of interaction between the Byzantine and Classical Roman Empires that you claim to be simultaneous”.

      I claim to be able to show interaction between Rome and Constantinople for the first time. So far that was nearly impossible. One has always wondered that, e.g., after some 300 years rulers call themselves Flavius again, and repeat the deeds of the Flavians from the 1st century 1:1 etc. (see 2nd table in my posting). They even leave inscriptions at Rome and Ostia at the 4th century, although flats, latrines, streets, harbours, breakwaters etc. built at that time are completely missing.

      I try to show stratigraphically that these repetitions are by no means a miracle. There are simply no repetitions but joint actions. The texbook idea that Rome does not cooperate with Constantinople in the 1st-3rd century, and Constantinople does not cooperate with Rome in the 4th-6th century, is due to textbook chronology but not to history.

      Re my 1st table: I want to show that it is not due to some madness that the Jewish wars of the 1st and 2nd century are repeated in the 4th and 5th century. Archaeologically nothing is repeated at all, because hard evidence for legion camps etc. exists for only one set of wars.

      Cordially, Gunnar Heinsohn

  4. John Miller says:

    This is very interesting. It is great to see actual History, rather than separated.

    Has Professor Heinsohn contemplated extending these findings beyond the “1st” through “10th” centuries AD?

    As an example, the History of England in the “8th” century is remarkably similar to the History of England in the “11th” centuries. The danish invasion of 766 AD is eerily similar of the more famou Norman Conquest of 1066.

    in Spain, Rodrigo if Vivar’s “11th century” campaigns against the Muslims occur far too long after the campaigns of Pelagius of Asturias for it to make sense.

    In fact, we may go the opposite way as well. Professor Heinsohn has shown the doubt over the “Ptolemaic Age”in antiquity.

    Thus, Zenobia(Father’s Pride) has a remarkably similar life to Cleopatra, as just one example.

  5. malagabay says:

    There are lots of intriguing echoes…
    And finding firm ground is challenging.

    According to the mainstream the Sea Peoples were active “seafaring raiders” for about 275 years between 1275 and 1000 BCE.

    Coincidently, the Sea Peoples are eerily similar to the Vikings who were active seafaring raiders for about 273 years between 793 and 1066 AD.




  6. Pingback: Roman Chronology: Legendary Legions | MalagaBay

  7. Pingback: Latin Languages: Italic Iberians | MalagaBay

  8. Pingback: Enigmatic Egypt: Roman Ruination – Red Sea Hills | MalagaBay

  9. Pingback: L for Leaguestone | MalagaBay

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.