What if I told you that the year is not 2023, but 1726? What if I told you that the entire early Middle Ages were a fabrication, and that Charlemagne never existed? Sounds crazy, right? Well, this is exactly what a German historian named Heribert Illig proposed in 1991, in a theory known as the Phantom Time Hypothesis.
According to Illig, the calendar we use today is based on a lie. He claims that three powerful rulers – Pope Sylvester II, Holy Roman Emperor Otto III, and Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII – conspired to change the dating system in 1000 AD, to make it seem that Otto had begun his reign in the millennial year of 1000 AD, rather than 996 AD. To do this, they forged documents, created fake historical events and people, and added an extra 297 years to history.
Illig’s main evidence for his theory is the lack of historical and archaeological records for the period between 614 and 911 AD. He argues that this period was unusually dull and uneventful, compared to the periods before and after. He also points out some inconsistencies between the Julian and Gregorian calendars, and some anachronisms in Roman architecture in 10th century western Europe.
Of course, Illig’s theory has been widely criticized and rejected by most historians and scholars. They point out many flaws and contradictions in his arguments, such as the existence of independent sources of evidence for the early Middle Ages from other regions of the world, such as China, India, and the Islamic world. They also question his motives and methods, and accuse him of cherry-picking and ignoring facts that do not fit his narrative.
In my opinion, while this sounds interesting and knowing that it may appeal to some people who are fascinated by conspiracy theories and alternative histories, I don’t think that it has any real evidence, but I’ll admit I don’t know everything about it. Instead, check out this video and judge for yourself.