Stuck in time, or ahead of it?

Stuck in time,

The Phantom Time Hypothesis explained.

“...German historian Heribert Illig has just published his new hypothesis, and the world of historians was [...] up in arms about it.”

#Throwback, nostalgia, going ‘back to the old school’, all of these themes revolve around our perception of time. Whether we’re longing for days without the stress of adult living or enjoying a childhood favorite song, we all experience nostalgic feelings from time to time. Or, as they like to say on the ‘Gram or the Bird App, #throwback. This time, I’m throwing it back to an old pseudoscientific phenomenon, the Phantom Time Hypothesis, as posed by Heribert Illig. Before we lift off, it’s important to note that this isn’t necessarily a conspiracy theory, but rather a ‘thesis’ in the realm of pseudoscience."

What we’re going to do right here is go back, way back, back into time. To the early 1990s, to be exact. The Berlin Wall had just fallen and the Cold War is over. Time to rejoice! Meanwhile, German historian Heribert Illig has just published his new hypothesis, and the world of historians was, and still is, up in arms about it. The majority of them is highly critical about it. This is especially the case since Illig has a history of writing and publishing revisionist pieces, most of them revolving around medieval Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. This would cause many people to think, “what’s to be found in the hypothesis?”

In short, the Phantom Time Hypothesis poses that the years 614-911 AD never actually happened, and were somehow added to the Early Middle Ages. This includes the ruler Charlemagne the Great, the entire Carolingian Era, a large chunk of Holy Roman Empire history, and more. So why would this be the case? I mean, that’s a large and important part of history. Well, according to Illig, there was a pact that was decided on by Holy Roman Emperor Otto III, Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII and Pope Sylvester II, that was meant to completely fabricate the Anno Domini dating system -which is still in use today, mind you- in order to make them the rulers around the important year 1000 AD. This would, in Illig’s eyes, make them seem powerful, since people in the Middle Ages though an apocalypse or the Rapture would happen that year, a bit like the Y2K phenomenon around the turn of this millennium. Illig especially has difficulties with the Gregorian calendar, initiated by Pope Gregory XIII, which was introduced as a correction to the Julian calendar of Julius Caesar. Something, according to him, just didn’t quite click. He also finds Romanesque architecture to be suspicious. If you follow the logic of his hypothesis, and you place Romanesque churches in his chronology, then the Roman Era happened much closer to us than was earlier thought. Mind you, Romanesque architecture has nothing to do with Roman architecture, both were a couple centuries apart from each other even if you follow Illig’s ‘logic’. These were just a couple of the things he’s posed over time.

or ahead of it?

Femke van Lieshout

Of course this hypothesis didn’t come out of reviews unscathed. Perhaps the most important bit of criticism it received was that by focusing only on the Holy Roman Empire -i.e. Continental Western Europe-, it failed to take other parts of the world into account. During the time Illig discussed, the Islamic expansion took place in the Middle East and the Maghreb, which is arguably one of the most significant events in history. Also, by saying that the years 614-911 were ‘entirely made up’, Illig was also saying that the entire Tang dynasty in China was made up. When he said that historians “focus too much on written sources,” he spread a flat-out lie because there are also other types of sources historians use, such as reading tree circles (dendrochronology for those who are curious) and astrology. And perhaps the simplest point of critique, was “why?” Why would these leaders take the time to devise this scheme? They don’t actually profit off of it in any realistic way. In this way, the hypothesis quickly loses its power. This left Illig with major loss of face, but he kept on publishing books related to the topic.

Why, after having gone through so much scrutiny, would Illig want to continue publishing material? He released multiple books questioning the very existence of Charlemagne the Great and the Holy Roman Empire via his own publishing company. All the available titles come off as pretty clickbait-like. I’d hypothesize (pun quasiintended) that these titles, among the Phantom Time Hypothesis, are mostly meant as a means for Illig to earn money. I would see no other reason for him to keep publishing even after academic scrutiny than for him to earn a living. With this, he’s truly ahead of his time. What a throwback, what a ride. If you’re not confused yet, congrats! If you are, that’s totally understandable. In all, the Phantom Time Hypothesis is a weird one, and one must have serious audacity to claim the nonexistence of 300 years of history. Add a nice throwback touch to it that it’s been published first in the 1990s. And look at me now, still talking about it right here, today.

Conspiracy Theories