Phantom time hypothesis

The thesis of Invented Middle Ages (also phantom time theory ) states that for some 300 years, were starting, invented in the 7th century. So to be followed 911 to the year 614, the year.

Heribert Illig put forward the theory that one can correct the distance allegedly trumped- year chronology of the Middle Ages. Hans -Ulrich Niemitz who joined this idea, called the period then phantom time, because the Frankish kingdom by Clovis I, a product of the imagination or the deception was. In particular, would, according to this theory people like Charlemagne and the Carolingian other before Charles III. the Simple either not exist, or they should be classified before 614 or after 911.

From historians and medievalists this thesis is considered to be completely erroneous and rejected.

Fundamentals of the theory and its refutation by the specialized science

The thesis of the invented medieval heard on the topic of the chronology of criticism, and to keep the areas of customer calendar, astronomy, diplomacy, archeology, architectural history and historical geography.

Illig was assumed that within the chronology of the historical sciences, a circular reference lies: Modern absolute datings, as radiocarbon dating (with respect to conversion radiocarbon years in historical years) or dendrochronology ( a piecewise created time series) are aligned in principle on the assumed to be correct chronology, could therefore not be used as evidence for their accuracy. Another chronology, provided that the current wrong and the new would be correct, would only lead to a redefinition of the basic parameters of absolute datings. From historians and medievalists this thesis is considered erroneous and rejected. In public, the thesis has found some interest.

Calendar customer

The thesis has its origin and thus its basis in the criticism of the traditional calendar. Heribert Illig assumes that in the reform of the calendar by Pope Gregory XIII. made in 1582, correction of the Julian calendar ( year = 365.2422 days ) of ten days was failed by three days too short. The total deviation since the introduction of the Julian calendar ( year = 365.25 days ) in the year 46 BC would have been summed up in 1582 to a total of 12.48 days ( 0.0078 days · 1628). Due to the fact that in 1582 these three days did not have to be corrected, Illig derived the missing three centuries, which he calculated in the output time jumps, Issue 3/ 1993 to exactly 297 years and the period in question on September 614 to August 911 eingrenzte.

Will contrast levels that the date of the day and night are equally is not delivered to the introduction of the Julian calendar and March 21 was set as the beginning of spring until the first Council in Nicea in 325 AD for the further calculations the date of Easter. Until the calendar reform in 1582 had shifted over the past 1257 years, the astronomical beginning of spring on March 21 to 9.73 days on 11 March, which is why Pope Gregory XIII. the calendar reform in 1582, in the relevant papal bull Inter gravissimas possessed and March 11, with the ten-day correction on March 21, moved back to the front. Thus, the calendar correction for 10 days does not contradict the existing annual count.

Diplomatics

Illig claims that original documents from the said period are very scanty and of people usually speak only very unspecific. Moreover, ( early 13th century ) were converted numerous documents from majuscule to minuscule font font from the 10th century to the time of Frederick II, was therefore rewritten, after they had destroyed the old documents. Falsification of around 300 years was possible in this case.

To the knowledge of the historical sciences, however, there are about 7000 documents for the period in question. The 9th century was the richest of the entire early Middle Ages to authors and manuscripts for the monastic literature. The copying was the only way to copy texts for medieval contemporaries. A general devaluation of the texts of the Middle Ages, as it can be found at Illig is scientifically untenable.

Archeology

The third basis of the thesis is the archeology criticism. It is based on the assertion that there are few archaeological remains and that this wrong n in the period between the 7th and 10th century AD are dated. To this end, examples were given of Bavaria.

The history of scientific publications, however, can be seen that there are a large number of archaeological finds of the era in question. In various museums, some of which are open to the public. The layers of the Carolingian period can be clearly demonstrated (eg in Paderborn ). The results of dendrochronology speak against Illig's theses.

Astronomy

Astronomy criticism is not one of the original and core elements of the thesis Illig. By astronomical investigations but it is now refuted. The counter-argument Illig argues that his theses by astronomical recalculations " not strictly refutable be " because this in his opinion for the period in question to be " unsafe sources " were based. He explains that although there was evidence in the form of astronomical observations against his thesis, but cites a quote of the astronomer Dieter B. Herrmann, which applies only to solar eclipses. The quote is taken out of context, Herrmann himself protested against the use of his words by Illig.

Astronomical events of the past are indeed in individual cases is difficult to unambiguously assign a date, but the view of many historical observations gives a consistent picture. As Dieter B. Herrmann cites, are the reports of Hydatius of Aquae Flaviae two total solar eclipses, the (now Portugal) occurred in Aquae Flaviae within a distance of 29.5 years, very closely by astronomical calculations. They are unique to a time and thus not be reconciled with the thesis Illig's consistent.

More chronology critical theses

First chronology critical theses were developed by historian Harry Bresslau and then picked up by other writers such as Wilhelm Kammeier. Individual statements and even references from Illig indicate that they appear to have been taken over by comb eggs without having made it to the readers clear from the outset.

See Chronologiekritik # ​​theses