Talk:Edwin Johnson (historian)

Time Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

100s of years never happened?

"In “The Pauline Epistles” Johnson suggests that the whole historical period between 700 and 1400 A. D. did not actually exist." Pardon? Why would a book on Pauline epistles make such an absurd claim, unless it was to make some rhetorical point about the absence of sources? What is the source for this? Paul B 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, well, it seems he did really believe that! Paul B 22:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well if history is made of documents or records, and we have no documents or records we can reliably date as existing before the age invention of printing / the revival of letters, then we have no history before that date. Obviously events happened, we just have no record of them. This is not controversial or refutable. What is controversial is - what documents are reliable and how can we date them? Admikkelsen (talk) 19:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know if Johnson's eccentric views on chronology influenced the Russian New Chronology movement? Muzilon (talk) 11:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. Edwin Johnson was not the first person to come to the conclusion that ancient and mediaeval history was largely falsified.

Previously Jean Hardouin had written about how all the "early Church leaders" such as Augustine and Jerome were fabrications of the late middle ages. Hardouin also spoke at length about many "ancient" coins were made no earlier than the 16th century to "fill in" history. However, he still believed in the chronological framework.

Likewise, Isaac Newton had spoken of the official version of ancient history being far too long, and suggested taking more than 1800 years off it. However, Newton believed that everything from the time fo Alexander the Great on was more or less accurate.

Johnson's early books basically tread a similar ground as Hardouin's. However, unlike Hardouin, Johnson felt that Christianity and Judaism are both only originated in c. 1200 AD the earliest, and are European in origin.

With "The Pauline Epistles" Johnson became the first person to point out the impossibility of accurate recorded history before the 15th century AD, and stated that nothing before that date can be thought of as reliable. Meanwhile, in the earlier "The Rise of Christendom" Johnson had shown how many "historical figures" from before the Late Middle Ages are "reflections", or historical duplicates, of genuine figures from the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

After Johnson, Robert Baldauf wrote two volumes showing the impossibility of the official story of Charlemagne and the Dark Ages, as well as exposing the reality of the "ancient" Greek and Roman writers, and the fact that they all used Late Mediaeval and/or Renaissance vocabulary, syntax and concepts.

Wilhelm Kammeier wrote extensively on ancient and early mediaeval history in the 193-'s and 1940's, and showed how there is nothing genuine from before the Late Middle Ages.

Fomenko took up these writings, and attempted to reconstruct genuine history of c. 1000 AD - 1600 AD, using the "reflections"/duplicates idea, mediaeval documents, etc. He has taken the "reflections"/duplicates ideas to levels beyond anything Johnson came up with, and has stated that the "mediaeval forgeries" are actually genuine artifacts, which were only later "thrown back in time". Sadly, Fomenko is convinced that all genuine history of 1000 AD - 1600 AD is Russian in origin.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.88.60.150 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Need to find some personal details

Does anyone know anything about Johnson? Little in the article relates to the man, and much of it looks a bit like WP:OR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.147.172.198 (talk) 18:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson's posthumously-published The Rise of English Culture includes a biographical preface by E.A. Petherick. Perhaps it could be incorporated into this article. Muzilon (talk) 11:31, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edwin Johnson (historian). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927030826/http://www.radikalkritik.de/pauline_epistles.htm to http://www.radikalkritik.de/pauline_epistles.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Edwin Johnson (historian). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:28, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]