Wladyslaw Polakowski

Chronological concepts of history of the Europe for the period from a beginning of the common era up to a late middle ages following from latinlanguage of the sources.
The results of the application of the multialternativness formalism

1. Chronological concept of the history of the Europe: its support on the sources
2. Application of theoretical bases of the reconstruction from the viewpoint of the chronology for construction of the most probable chronological models of the history of the European middle ages.
3. Set of the provisional versions of the reconstruction
4. Brief results

So, the work of the book author "The chronological concepts of history of the mankind for the period from a beginning of the common era up to a late middle ages following from latinlanguage of the sources" [098], which is exposed in Internet on (english version). The version of this work submitted in this book, differs from the internet-version only by easy adaptation to stylistics of the book.

1. Chronological concept of history of the Europe: its support on sources

As it was possible to establish to the author of these lines on the basis of the work of Anthony Grafton (183), the standard European chronology for the period from so-called Christ Bitrh before times of the late middle ages was constructed under the following circuit (Circuit 1):

Eusebius > Hieronimus (Jerome) > Prosper (both continuators) > Victor, Hydacius, Marcelinus Comes > Ioannes Biclarum > Chronicon imperiale, Flores temporum, Sigebert von Gembloux

The circuit 1. The European chronology for the period from so-called Christ Bitrh before times of the late middle ages The circuit is made on the basis of the items of the information from Grafton (183), which there contain on different pages.

From three sources mentioned in last part of the circuit, there is Sigebert von Gembloux, or Sigibertis Gemblensis. As to his chronicle [024], he based on the far predecessor Ioannes Biclarum (previous part of the circuit), and on not so rich on sources the period 600-800 CE He took the items of the information from Beda Venerabilis and Fredegarii. Per poorest of all periods (750-950 CE), traditionally named by dark centuries - from Einhardi (in general in any way not dated, in that kind, as the author of the clause with it(him) has got acquainted in [016]), and Annales Mettenses (annals of the city Mez). After end of the dark centuries of the sources has appeared more, we can mention many from them, but, especially to not be scattered, we shall mention only Flores temporum. (we here specially shall not consider the Greek sources, about which the will going in one of the following works of the author (as the author hopes, his the hands will reach them nevertheless) - them it will be possible without effort to enter in the existing circuit at presence about them of the appropriate information).

If to be set by the issue on tradition datings medieval latinlanguage of the sources, after study of the given issue it is simple to reach a conclusion, that the documents (as narratives, and acts) are dated basically in two global traditions: AD (Anno domini, years from Christ Bitrh), and AM (Anno Mundi, year from of the world creation). There are certain documents, which are dated in local tradition: years of the government of that or other governor. Others of the dating exotical. Thus is present a little (at least, not one) traditions of the recalculation of the years from of the world creation within from Christ Birth. We on it pay in the work steadfast attention.

2. Application of theoretical bases of the reconstruction from the viewpoint of the chronology for construction of the most probable chronological models of history of the European middle ages.

In this section the elementary example of the application of theoretical bases of the reconstruction for the period will be given, it is traditional related to late antiquity and middle ages. We shall for simplicity consider, that the basic chronological scales were scales AD (Anno domini) and AM (Anno mundi). They were recalculated each other with numbers 5200 (concept Eusebius, was popular down to the global chronicle by Hartm,an Schedel (XVI centuries, is also known as Nurhberg chronicle)), and 5500 (Sextus Iulius Africanus, partial reflection are the Russian annals with their tradition AM-AD = 5508). On it we also shall stop. It is possible, certainly, to take other circuits of the recalculation and to observe, that thus will be observed. But it already in other time.

We shall illustrate our idea on chronological shifts and problems of the recalculation from one era in another on an example of the circuit taken from of the site, devoted to problems of the milleniumism and book by Rubinksy-Wiseman [022]. 'History of the End of the World' (fig. 2-1).

Fig. 2-1. Chronological shifts and nature variety in recalculations of the era from of the world creation per common era.

In this figure all standard chronological traditions and are shown that from them follows. First at the left inclined straight line (AMI) symbolizes tradition AM-AD = 5500 (Sextus Iulius Africanus). On it are represented as points Hippolitus, Eusebius, Lactatius and Hieronymus in the chronological order. Thus it is supposed, that for them the dating in AD is known (horizontal axis), and the dating in AM - is unknown (vertical axis). For all points is observed and graphically equality AM-AD = 5500 is illustrated. The early years are years cool (cold), when preachers of the end of the world is not audible, further there are years moderate (temperate), and approximately hundred years prior to theoretically probable and predictable end of the world (in AD 400 = AM 5900) hot activity of the preachers already begins in connection with the hung danger (danger). Second at the left inclined straight line (AMII) symbolizes the second tradition, within the framework of which AM-AD = 5200. On it all historical characters also are represented on the basis of their dating in the textbooks(tutorial) of history. The same as and on the first straight line, is represented Eusebius - only much below on a vertical, as on this straight line to his year 300 AD corresponds 5500 AM, instead of the 5800, as on the first straight line. Further go Hieronymus, Augustinus, Iulian (certain contemporary of the Beda), Beda, Fredegar. Directly ahead of the planned approach of the end of the world works certain Beatus. Third at the left straight line, probably, should reflect a certain tradition of the recalculation, by which the abbey a background Flori (Abbo von Fleury) was guided, which worked during life of the emperor Otto III (years of the government 983-1002). However, such chronological tradition is not popular, therefore we shall not on it stop long.

Let's pay attention of the reader, that that was mentioned at Sigibert, but is not reflected in Rubinsky and Wiseman in [022], it is possible to name only local chronicle Annales Mettenses (annals of the city Mez, one of the few, and That's why the extremely important chronicle of the times, is traditional related to governing of Charles the Great 800-1000 CE).

Now before us there is a basic task: according to our technique by an optimum image to present the European history as separate blocks. Fortunately, the not worse way of such splitting prompts us the considered figure 2-1 (here to us even carries slightly. Neither for a history Russia, nor for a history of the Great Mongolian empire we of such beautiful circuit to represent we can not and compelled to work with other methods). From this figure all support of the European history on sources is clearly visible. Let's represent it as the table of the list of the years CE (Table 1):

Years CE Annalists
-45 - 330 - Eusebius
330 - 490 - translators and continuators of Eusebius (Hieronimus (Jerome), Prosper (both his continuators, according to Grafton), Victor, Hydacius, further for brevity all set of the sources we shall simply designate as {Jerome}, what meant - Hieronymus and his nearest continuators).
550 - 780 - Beda Venerabilis+Fredegar (one was writing in England, second in continentel Europe. The book author for some reason is sure, that in their compilations there are common places).
800 - 950 - Annales Mettenses
950 and further - there are a lot of the chronicles, since already mentioned Sigibert from Gembloux. One of the most important has appeared Flores temporum written by the schwabian monk shortly before 1300. For brevity them we shall designate by one expression FT.
Table 1. Splitting of the European history into chronological blocks
For fig.2-1 three critical points are clearly visible: 500 AD, 800 AD and 1000 AD. These years the numerous prophets prophesied (or ostensibly prophesied) second comings, after which there would come qualitatively new period in a history of the mankind.

If to return to a task of the most correct reconstruction of the picture past, that, following a technique, it is reduced to a task of the formal construction of the various reconstruction versions on the basis of the various chronological interpretations of the separate chronicles, i.e. place of the most complete set of their probable originals. The various combinations of these probable originals also will be probable pictures of the reconstruction of the mankind.

Now we shall be set by one essential issue: by the issue of the number of the probable originals of the image of the event and chronicle, which can arise at presence of the different information about record traditions and reading.

If about tradition of the record and reading everything is known, any issues on multialternativeness do not arise, for one will take place only rigidly fixed variant.

Now we admit, that we have two traditions: T1 and T2 (for example, two traditions of the dating of the events from of the world creation, AM-AD = 5500 and AM-AD = 5200), and certain historical material, which is dated in these traditions.

At first we admit, that we shall be engaged only in reading of the dates from this source, that is we shall consider only process of the reading of the dates of the source. Then we, having before eyes two traditions, shall was simply fix two probable originals of the image of the event described in a source, as it is represented in figure 02-3-1

Fig. 02-3-1. A interdependence between the probable originals of the events on a timebase in case of the simple reading from a source on the basis of the two chronological traditions.
Where I1, I2 - beginning Erae, E1, E2 - the probable originals of the considered event

It is visible, that in case of the simple reading of the probable originals arises as much, how many exists of the chronological traditions.

Now let's consider more complex process: reading after preliminary record. We admit, certain event, which really had a place, was fixed in two traditions: T1 and T2. We shall in detail illustrate our statement by figures 02-3-2 - 02-3-4.

On first of them, on 02-3-2, the process of the record of the event in a source is considered which can take place in case of the presence of the two record traditions T1 and T2:

(Attention! All figures - see in book!)

Fig. 02-3-2. Record of the event in a source in case of the presence of the two chronological record traditions.

Further we shall tell, that at process of the reading each of these events can be at first write, and soon it can be readen(perusal) as in their own era and in the other era too, as is shown on the picture 02-3-3. I.e. erae of the fixation (writing) of this event and era of its reding (its perusal) can coincide but both they can noy coincide. Then, in the general case are possible three images of this event.

Fig. 02-3-3. Occurrence of the three probable images of the event as a result of the probable noncoincidence of the chronological traditions of the writng(fixation) of the events and reading (perusal).

At copying a source such three images can be fixed, therefore there can be a picture represented in a fig. 02-3-4. (Generally, the tradition of the final fixing of the images can differ from tradition of the initial record, That's why instead of the T1 and T2 we shall name axes in a fig. 02-3-5 T3 and T4).

Fig. 02-3-4. The fixed picture of the presence of the three probable images of the events in sources dated of the certain record traditions.

If now from traditions T1 and T2 we shall proceed to habitual for us to common era, each of these images of the events, again, can be counted on two traditions, and results of the recalculation in some cases can coincide. In detail author on it will not be stop, and the results of this recalculation are reproduced in a fig. 02-3-5.

Fig. 02-3-5. Interdependence between images of the events and their probable originals in case of the absence of the information about precise record traditions and reading.

Where the top part of the figure are images of the event, and bottom is a set of its probable originals.

It is obvious, that the first part only from the certain circuit of the reasonings is reproduced only which it is possible and to continue and gegneralize on the second, third, etc. copyings. But because of the absence of the place we shall not be do it.

By carrying out absolute similar reasonings in the return order, we shall come to a conclusion, that one image of the event in a source can be to have in such case four probable originals.

Let's return to figure 2-1. On it is represented the assumption that to various temporal pieces of the textbook of history in the assumption of the initial fixing of the dates in Erae from of the world creation are corresponding different traditions of the recalculation from of the world creation per common era. If originally events were fixed in tradition from of the world creation, to each of the events which have been written down thus, that can corerspond four probable originals in years of the common era, and if they was fixing in years of the common era - three. In our case essentially that, speaking formally, Eusebius can have three probable originals (without application of the principle antiantiquing). The same as also his continuators (for brevity we shall mention only of the one of them - Hieronymus, which for brevity on all circuits we shall designate {Jr})).

Similarly, the Beda can have too three probable originals, is exact the same as also period of the chronicle Flores temporum for the period from 950 up to 1300 CE (for brevity we shall designate simply FT). And here Annales Mettenses we owing to absence of the information do not concern.

Let's represent images and probable originals in a fig. 2-3.

Fig. 2-3. The circuit of the probable originals latinlanguage of the chronicles fixed in a basis the standard concept of the development of the civilization by consideration of the two chronological traditions: AM-AD = 5200 and AM-AD = 5500. (Little note. Further with the purpose of the simplification we shall write instead of the (B+Fr.) it is simple B. That is, for example, not (B+Fr.) 2, and B2.

3. Set of the eventual reconstruction versions.

Basing on the circuit of the probable originals represented in a fig. 2-3, we shall build chronological models of the reconstruction.

At once we shall note, that improbable those versions are represented to the author of the given lines, despite of the required formalism, in which the originals of the events lay before their images reflected in the textbooks(tutorial) of history (application of the principle antiantiquing). Therefore he on it in general to give of the attention will not be.

Each of the turned out versions the author will write down in the form:


That will designate, that the reconstruction looks as follows:
Ei - i-th (with number I) the version Eusebius+j-th the version Hieronymus+k-th the version of the Beda and Fredegar+l-th (for today unique) version of the annals of the city Mez+m-thaw version Flores temporum.

(For Example, the record E1J1B2MT1FT2 means: the first version Eusebius+first Hieronymus+second Beda+first (and unique) of Annales Mettensis+second of the Flores temporum).

We continue process of the simplification, we try to clear our field of the versions of all superfluous (that reconstruction versions it turned out not so much, and from them improbable - in general it is not enough). With this purpose we shall unit blocks Eusebius with the block of his continuators (Hieronymus).

Then by most probable the following versions will turn out:

1. Version, free from nigilismus and based on provisional reliability of the each of the chronicles - images. At creation of the versions we can accept that chronologically they lay in different epoch or in one (accordingly they will turn out overlapping (laying in one epoch) and not overlapping (laying in different)). Besides a part from the chronicles we can in general reject, not taking them in attention (message ourselves nigilistical). Such versions we shall name nigilistical.

1.2. The not overlapped versions, at which all blocks chronologically lay in different epoch
E2J2B2MT0FT2 - traditional (all probable originals lay equally on the same places, as in the textbook of history)
E2J2B3MT0FT2 - is improbable, as many years will turn out, during which in general nothing occured (500-800 CE), therefore is more probable
E3J3B3MT0FT2 - version Illig, stated on pages of his book "Das erfundene Mittelalter. Hat Karl der Grosse je gelebt? " [015] ("The invented middle ages. Whether lived in general Charles the Great?")
(we shall explain this version more-less in detail.. At such version (E3J3) all characters of the chronicles Eusebius and Hieronymus are moved together for 300 years on later times, (for example, probable original of Tiberius (14-37 CE Under the textbook of history) it appears in (314-337 CE), Caius Caligula (37-41 CE Under the textbook of history) - in (337-341 CE), Marcus Aurelius Antonin (161-180 CE Under the textbook of history) - in (461-480 CE). The probable original of Markian, emperor of the Eastern-Roman empire (450-457 CE Under the textbook of history) - in 750-757 years CE). The characters of the Beda Venerabilis and Fredegarii (B3) are also are moved together for 300 years on later times in comparison with the textbook of history, it concerns in the basic characters, described By a Beda, of the English history and described in Fredegarii Merovingen: the probable original of Chlodvig (481 - 511 CE Under the textbook of history) get on 781 - 811 CE, The probable original Childeber I (511-558 under the textbook of history) gets on 811-858 CE Etc. The characters of the annals of the city Mez we not consider, and as to the characters Flores temporum, all of them remain on the places (for example, Otto III (983-1002), Friedrich I Barbarossa Hohenstaufen (1152-1190), Otto IV von Wittelsbach (1208-1218), Friedrich II, son of Henry VI (1281-1250)).
The author expresses hope, that stated is stated rather clearly, and in the further so detailed examples will result is littleer.

1.2. Overlapped, at which the separate making chronicles get on one epoch.
E3J3B2MT0FT2 - on epoch 400-800 years were come both Eusebius, and Fredegar. It is necessary then to expand geographical spaces of the reasonings (for example, Fredegar wrote about West, and Eusebius - about East)
E3J3B3MT0FT2 - here on one epoch have a Beda and Annales Mettenses. Probably, the version has chances of the true in the offer, that geography of the narration of the Beda and Annales Mettenses are various.

1.3. Nigilizing the versions based on unauthenticity of the separate of the chronicles - images.
If any chronicle has lack of the reliability, it should be considered on suspicion in complete fiction. Such variants we shall or designate as Chr (nihil), where instead of the Chr we shall substitute names of those or other chronicles, or, in complex expressions, we shall not mention it at all in any way. Such method we shall name as a method consecutive nigilisations.
B2MT0FT2 - if at all to cross out Eusebius as a source obviously doubtful, thus a Beda and Fredegar on the traditional places. Approximately coincides with Morosow.
B2FT3 - would be improbable, as displayed a temporal failure for the period 950-1300 years
B3FT2 - Beda and Fredegar it appear for three centuries to us closer, and Flores temporum on the place
FT2 - all authentic history of the mankind begins only with times Otto III, and probable declaration of his crowning year as year of the beginning new of the millenium. Probably, thus (act of the declaration new of the millenium) Otto III wanted, on the one hand, majestify itself, and, on the other hand to finish with existing chronological variety, which could be caused by activity of the numerous prophets, frequently proclaiming by the lieprophets (for example, Abbo von Fleury).
FT3 - all authentic history of the mankind begins only with XIII-XIV of the centuries, and its initial stage are the probable originals Flores temporum, laying in XIV-XVI centuries.
(EJrBMTFT) nihil - all authentic history begins only with XIV centuries, and any of the probable originals of the chronicles listed in brackets, is not authentic.
So, at us only logically from the admission, that is primary true there was a tradition of the record of the years AM, it has turned out approximately seven to some extent of the equiprobable versions. Now it is possible to be accepted behind study of the separate documents of those epoch, in particular for act a material, and after that, beginning to the second stage of the work to give by each of them the rating Evaluation.

4. Brief results. In this section the basic chronological concepts of history of the mankinds following from latinlanguage of the sources for the period of the middle ages were represented. The traditional version, and also version Heribert Illig and Nicolas Morosow has turned out as one of the special cases.

The set of the most probable reconstruction versions of the events agrees latinlanguage to sources we can look as follows: 1. E2J2B2MT0FT2 - traditional version
2. E3J3B3MT0FT2 - version Illig
3. E3J3B2MT0FT2
4. E3J3B3MT0FT2
5. B2MT0FT2 - version Of the Morosow
6. B3FT2
7. FT2
8. FT3
9. (EJrBMTFT) nihil - nigilizing the version


1. Grafton Anthony. Joseph Justus Scaliger. A study in the History of Classical Scholarship. V. II. Historical chronology. Clarendon press. Oxford. 1993.
2. Karl der Grosse, wie Eginhart ihn beschrieben, die Legende in derge steht..... Altona, 1814
3. Sigeberti Gemblensis Chronicon Universale, inde ab anno christi quingentesimo usque annum milliesium et quingentesimum. MGH, Scriptores, Band 6
4. Rubinski Y. Wiseman A. The history of the End of the World. 1982
5. Сайт миллениумистов. Интернет,