Who was Dionysius
ERRS in 525 AD
ONLY in 525 AD did
acting under the orders of Pope St. John I,
set the start of the current era to 1 Anno Domini
- the alleged date of the birth of Christ -
based on what the Encyclopaedia Britannica
(at the entry Dionysius Exiguus)
"a modified Alexandrian computation
(95-year tables evolved by the patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria)
based on Victorius of Aquitaine's 532-year cycle."
Prior to this time,
the calendar had been dated
alleged date of the founding of Rome.
As the Britannica writes, Dionysius
"WRONGLY dated the birth of Christ
according to the Roman system
(i.e. 754 years after the founding of
as Dec. 25, 753."
This is of course was in error because,
as noted in the Britannica under Christianity
"Origins of the Church Year",
it is stated:
"Early Christians believed that the new age
promised by Jesus
had dawned with his RESURRECTION",
NOT at his "human birth".
should have set the Winter Solstice date
of December 25, 786
to mark the human birth of Jesus.
Historians we have
continued this error ever since,
bending Roman history to make it suit the errored chronology.
One result of
can be seen by examining the alleged dates
of the "Secular Games" of the Romans
(see Encyclopaedia Britannica under Secular Games).
By Etruscan tradition,
these games were held 100 years apart,
is great problem at 46 BC,
when the Secular Games were allegedly not
(this is the year of Julius Caesar's calendric reform)
but RATHER only in
30 years later than 100 years.
Could the Romans not add?
it is the HISTORIANS who have made this error,
relying on Exiguus.
Based on a scholarly treatise by Ernst Hollstein, Mitteleuropäische
[The chronology of Europe by dendrochronology
(study of tree rings)]
Roman Chronology is prima facie wrong by ca. 30 years.
states, when you have enough samples
- dating to a year by tree rings
is no problem.
His massive volume of nearly 300 pages
is an astute, detailed synthetic scientific work
of the kind which made
famous in past centuries.
In Hollstein's book,
published in 1980
(Hollstein has since passed away),
there is found what
subsequently have erroneously alleged
to be a
26-year error in Hollstein's data,
since that data diverges
from accepted Roman Chronology
by that amount of time
- not by any
particular intent by Hollstein,
but simply because that is what the
gave as results
No one had any idea "why" the data
Mainstream scholars of course
thought Hollstein had erred,
never thinking to examine
their OWN historical chronology,
fact is based on less solid grounds
than Hollstein's work
- and, in the
end result, is simply wrong.
THEY have erred.
page 74, Hollstein discusses his tree-ring data for the Roman Bridge at
Cologne, Germany, which according to an analysis of the remains of
trees used to build it, was built ca. 336 A.D., whereas the Roman
Emperor Constantine the Great (the first emperor to adopt Christianity
and thus to bring it to the Western world) held a speech in Trier about
the building of this very same bridge - by current chronology - at the
end of July, viz. beginning of August in 310 A.D. - a full 26 years
years PRIOR to the building of the bridge.
erred - was it
Hollstein? No, the tree ring data are clear and there is no serious
dispute about these tree ring findings.
In fact, as
observes, earlier dendrochronological dates from the nearby grave under
the later-built Cologne Cathedral (Kölner Dom) had already pointed to a
date of ca. 338 A.D. and since then - underneath the southern
"Querhaus" of the Cathedral - twelve [astronomers take note] wooden
posts were found - arranged as Hollstein notes in a "circular stave"
fashion, with evidence that they supported a roof.
ALSO dated to ca. 338 A.D.
even writes that he regretted
(p.5) already in 1972 not having accepted his earlier
dendrochronological findings as fact, even though they contradicted the
310 A.D. date used by the mainstream historians for the comparable
Hollstein's words in German "Ich hätte das jetzt vorliegende
wahre Datum dieser Pfähle 336 n.Chr. (vgl. Köln, Rheinbrücke) bereits
1972 akzeptieren müssen...."
Hollstein was by no means thrilled with his dates,
since they put him
into a scientific quandry,
having data which contradicted mainstream
and having no explanation available for the deviation.
of the accurate Roman chronology,
of Hollstein are essential and useful,
since they also point to a circa
30-year error in calendration.
Obviously, the tree-ring data
to a Roman Chronology and a 0 BC date
which was wrong.
Donate to the ISandIS Network
of blogs and websites
to help sustain our research and writing.
search words for LexiLine are: Aegean, Akkad, Anatolia, ancient,
astronomy, ancient Britain, ancient Europe, Ancient Greece, ancient
languages, ancient Near East, ancient signs, ancient
world, anthropology, archaeology, archaeoastronomy, art
history, artefacts, artifacts, astronomy, barrows, Biblical Studies,
paintings, celestial, civilization, Crete, cultural astronomy, Cyprus,
decipherment, dolmens, Egyptology, Elam, Fertile Crescent, geodetics,
heavens, hieroglyphs, history of art,
history of astronomy, history of civilization, history of mankind,
of science, history of technology, history of Western Civilization,
land survey, languages, linguistics, logograms, Luvian, Luwian,
megaliths, megalithic, Minoan, Mycenae, Neolithic, Neolithic
art, Oriental Studies, origins, origins of writing, Phaistos,
pictographs, planisphere, prehistoric, prehistoric art, Pyramids, rock
art, rock drawings, standing
stones, stars, stellar constellations, stone circles, stone rings,
Age, stone rows, Sumer, surveyors, tumuli, Andis, Andis Kaulins,