Arndt When the Sun Went Dark

Using Astronomy to Uncover History's True Chronology
1. Auflage 2026
ISBN: 978-3-6951-5436-4
Verlag: BoD - Books on Demand
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: 6 - ePub Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 224 Seiten

What if the astronomical events that anchor our history are an illusion? The established chronology of antiquity - from the Greeks to the Romans - relies on solar eclipses as unshakeable time-markers. "When the Sun Went Dark" is an explosive investigation into these very foundations. Mario Arndt, author of "History's Hidden Blueprint" and "History by Design", reveals how official historiography uses scientifically unjustifiable corrections (the "Delta T" value) to force ancient eclipse reports from Thucydides, Livy, or Babylon into a fabricated timeline. Arndt turns the tables: he analyzes the astronomical data without these arbitrary adjustments, searching for the real constellations. The result is revolutionary: Roman history is misdated by 781 years. The Greek "antiquity" took place over 1100 years later than we believe. Even the celebrated astronomer Claudius Ptolemy, a pillar of chronology, is exposed as a scientific fraud. This book is a meticulous astronomical proof that dismantles our forged past and uncovers humanity's true chronology. www.HistoryHacking.net

History analyst and author Mario Arndt writes about topics you won't find in traditional history books. He's from Germany (* 1963) and now lives in Thailand. His analyses of official history reveal how the Middle Ages, the ancient world, and the associated chronologies were fabricated and forged. His professional background in IT as a software developer enables him to develop a completely new understanding of the official version of history and to discover what really happened in the past. He has published eight books since 2012. Website: www.HistoryHacking.net

Autoren/Hrsg.

Arndt, Mario

Leseproben

Chronology and Astronomy

Introduction

The founder of scientific chronology, Joseph Justus Scaliger (1540-1609), already made use of astronomy and was in contact with astronomers who assisted him with his calculations, including Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), the discoverer of the laws of planetary motion.

These calculations served to link astronomical events, primarily solar and lunar eclipses, with historical events and thus with chronology. Astronomy was and is therefore an important field for establishing a valid, generally accepted chronology.

However, neither at that time nor before was there freedom of expression or free research (according to official history, with only a few exceptions, which is also highly doubtful). It is therefore completely open whether the chronology established at that time, and still valid today, with Jesus Christ at the beginning of our calendar, has anything to do with reality, with the actual past.

Fig. 1: Johannes Kepler and

Fig. 2: Joseph Justus Scaliger – The dream team of chronology

It could just as well have been decreed by the rulers of the time, e.g., in the sense of anchoring the Christian religion in history, with Jesus Christ at the center of time, just as Jerusalem was considered to be at the center of the world according to the ideas of that time.

I quote H. Fuhrmann, former president of the "Monumenta Germaniae Historica" (German Institute for Medieval Studies):

[Fuhrmann 1988, preface to MGH Volume 33.I.]

Since the establishment of today's official chronology was achieved with the help of astronomy, a critique of chronology cannot lead to valid results without taking into account the most important astronomical events in this context - solar and lunar eclipses.

Astronomy therefore also plays an important role in the work of A. Fomenko, for example [Fomenko 2003]. Fomenko considers a large part of the traditional astronomical reports to be authentic and not later calculations. The entire volume 3 of his "History: Fiction or Science?" is devoted to astronomical topics.

Fig. 3: The groundbreaking work "History – Fiction or Science" by the Russian mathematician and history analyst Anatoli Fomenko

Problems with the official dating of eclipse reports

This correlation of astronomical events, especially solar and lunar eclipses, with the time scale, or chronology, as established by Scaliger, is based exclusively on traditional (and, without proof, believed to be authentic) eclipse reports, their chronological classification according to official history, and their scientifically questionable interpretation.

Fig. 4: With his work "De emendatione temporum" (1583), Joseph Justus Scaliger establishes scientific chronology

This classification is appropriate for some, but by no means all, of the traditional eclipse reports, since, in addition to the inaccuracy of the records, the proportion of retrospectively added, retroactively calculated, and literary eclipses in the traditional events is unknown. The historian A. Demandt notes:

[Demandt, p. 469]

Demandt interprets "inaccurate or false" very generously, defining it as:

[Demandt, p. 469]

He therefore postulates, in a rather humanities-oriented manner

The problem with assigning official history is that it only works if strong, arbitrary fluctuations in the Earth's rotation in the early Middle Ages and antiquity are included in the calculations.

These fluctuations in the Earth's rotation cause deviations in universal time from terrestrial time, known as delta T, which influence the visibility of calculated eclipses. More on this later.

Fig. 5: Geometry of a total solar eclipse

The solar eclipse of June 16, 364 AD

British historian John K. Fotheringham (1874-1936) is somewhat more precise. Regarding the solar eclipse of June 16, 364, observed by Theon of Alexandria, he writes

[quoted by Stephenson 1997, p. 365].

Fig. 6: The solar eclipse of June 16, 364. It can be seen that the area of total solar eclipse (blue) is in Northern Europe. However, according to the report, the solar eclipse was observed in Egypt, where the degree of coverage was only 20%.

British astronomer F. Richard Stephenson (* 1941) agrees with this assessment in relation to Europe:

[1997, p. 365]

To clarify Fotheringham and Stevenson's point: not a single solar eclipse from ancient Europe has been handed down to us with time details and other information, and thus to any extent verifiable, since the observation took place in Alexandria, which is known not to be in Europe.

But did Theon actually observe this solar eclipse?

The eclipse is recorded in a commentary by Theon on Claudius Ptolemy's "Almagest." In Fig. 6, you can see that this solar eclipse was total in Northern Europe. In Alexandria, Egypt, where it was observed according to the report, the degree of obscuration was approximately 20% according to NASA calculations.

Fig. 7: The degree of obscuration of the solar eclipse of June 16, 364 in Alexandria was 20%.
Source: http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov

However, much of the data in the Almagest has been considered to have been calculated rather than observed since early modern times. In 1977, Robert R. Newton published his book The Crime of Claudius Ptolemy [Newton 1977]. More on Ptolemy later.

The solar eclipse of June 16, 364 belongs to the Saros cycle 91. A Saros cycle of solar eclipses comprises a series of eclipses at intervals of approximately 18 years, 11 days, and 8 hours, whose temporal successors are very similar.

Starting on April 5, 851, going backwards, a solar eclipse took place on the Nile exactly every 19,756 days (in present-day Egypt/Sudan/ Ethiopia), i.e., every third solar eclipse of the Saros cycle at intervals of approximately 54 years. These are the years 851, 797, 743, 688, 634, 580, 526, 472, 418, 364. Only the solar eclipses of 580 and 634 would probably only have been visible south of Ethiopia without targeted observation – with a degree of coverage of 30% there.

Figs. 8 & 9: The solar eclipses of July 19, 418, and August 20, 472

It would therefore come as no surprise if the solar eclipse of June 16, 364 were merely a retroactive calculation based on several successive observed solar eclipses occurring every 19,756 days, e.g., 851 => 797 => 743 => 688, always in the afternoon, 688, 743, and 797 even at almost the same time as 364.

Fig. 10: The paths of total and annular solar eclipses on the Earth's surface from 2021 to 2040

The periodicity of eclipses

Since there are no descriptions of solar eclipses with time specifications and further details for ancient Europe—often not even the exact location is known—they cannot be easily verified by back calculation. The information in the sources often leaves considerable scope for chronological classification. In many cases, the classification to the day was only made by back- calculating a solar eclipse.

Furthermore, the geographical scope is quite large, as not all solar eclipses were total at the specified or presumed observation site. However, due to the large number of eclipses, it is almost always possible to find a more or less suitable one if

1) the tolerated deviations are sufficiently large, and,

2) if you still cannot find a suitable one, you can formulate an ad hoc hypothesis.

The dates of ancient solar eclipses found by historians and astronomers to date are therefore only those that best match the sources based on the official chronology and the speculative assumption of strong, arbitrary fluctuations in the Earth's rotation in the early Middle Ages and antiquity (Delta T, more on this later). There is no verification.

Fig. 11: The solar eclipse of July 29, 1878 (drawing)

The periodicity of eclipses can be used to the dates of solar eclipses [cf. Popper 1935]. There are a number of time intervals after which a solar eclipse is very likely to occur...