I’ve been following Gunnar Heinsohn’s research work ever since he discovered that ancient Middle East history was expanded by concatenating local histories serially resulting in exaggerated chronologies. Heinsohn’s revisionism remains controversial but to date has also not been falsified.
Heinsohn’s methodology is strictly stratigraphical in so far that a past civilisation has to have stratigraphical evidence for its existence. On that basis Heinsohn proposed that the Sumerians were fictitious and were actually the Chaldeans whom the Romans knew about, but who did not know of the Sumerians.
More recently he has identified another fabrication of history, this time during the 1st millennium AD during which a climate catastrophe occurred ~ 950 AD from which we are the survivors. That catastrophe more or less wiped out the Roman Empire, and again, history was fabricated by concatenating local histories into a serial chronology expanding history by some 700 years. Again stratigraphy plays the dominant role in the reconstruction methodology; nowhere are there stratigraphic columns showing all of the interpreted civilisations and human habitation for the period in one place. In some places 10th AD strata overly Roman strata, then elsewhere 500 year strata overly Roman, or 950 strata overly Roman strata. Geologically this is similar to lateral facies change in a sedimentary stratum in which widely disparate sedimentary environments hosting different species of marine or water life are in reality existing at the same time.
The catastrophe of ~ 950AD could have been the Comet of Justinian, but erroneously placed at the 6th century AD.
One suspects that the survivors of this event, and who also documented the events of those times, were the literate monks and clergy of the Roman Church, and would have logically assumed that this latest catastrophe was the one foreseen in scripture and hence would have been the millennium; hence the logical assumption that they were at the end of the millennium, and so had a reference date, 1000 AD, from which they then fabricated the rest of the chronology to explain the remnants of the Roman period that indicated a time of ~ 250 AD etc.
This is a rather controversial revision of recent history but the stratigraphy offers no alternative explanation.
What this revision does do, however, is demolish the assumed chronology from which geological dating is derived, and hence the basis of scientific retro-calculation based on the assumption that the present is the key to the past.
The climate catastrophe that ended the 1st Millennium appears to have been global since there is good evidence that the Mayan civilisation collapsed at the time, but what is even more startling is the implication of the Piri Reis map that shows the Antarctic without ice.
If this map is dated to 1000AD and that the antarctic ice cap dates from that time, then we might have history very, very misunderstood.
For a start it means the historical climate reconstructions might seriously in error, if not entirely fictional as presently asserted. If Antarctica was ice free circa 1000AD, then the dating assumptions and ice stratigraphy becomes problematical, especially for historical reconstructions of climate.
One reason for this can be traced to the political machinations of the English Whigs during late 18th and early 19th centuries following on from the French Revolution and discussed by George Grinnell in his “The Origins of Modern Geological Theory” when Sir Charles Lyell published his ‘Principles of Geology’ that then formed the basis of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and both of which theories then informed Karl Marx and F. Engels and the political revolution they created.
Unlike Heinsohn, Charles Lyell ignored the stratigraphical evidence and cherry-picked his facts to fit his political inclination and goal, that of unseating the Tories from government in Britain; he succeeded much as his successors, the socialists of today, have succeeded with their climate-change meme, for they and he are from the same political bloodstock.
Science and politics mixing it together? Oh yes, and adad religion as well since our religious beliefs actually moderate our scientific beliefs; after all no devout Christian could contemplate an uncreated universe, and hence the restrictions imposed by the idea of absolute time.
Suffice it to say that it seems likely that the 1000 AD climate event terminated the Roman Period, formed the basis of the Australian aboriginal dreamtime and other native people’s creation myths, and geologically may have been marked by the Pleistocene extinction event since roman aqueducts appear to have been buried by early Holocene or late Pleistocene sediments near Cologne in Germany.
There are rather interesting times.