M. G. Corsini

 New Chronology, 3


September 8, 2013. All rights reserved


My hypothesis is that Jude and Israel were very little entities in Palestine. In the Bible we hear about Tyre, Damask, Moab, from which we have poor inscriptions, and few kings attested, and Egypt, Assyria and Babylon. Hebrew faked history can be divided in two parts: from Jeroboam and Roboam (about 930 B.C.) to the fall of Samaria under Sargon II (722 B.C.), and the prior faked history from the Exodus under Ramses II to Solomon.

Hebrew history starts to be credible from Tiglath-Phalasar III (745-727) on. Tiglath-Phalasar III in 732 B.C. subdued  Damask whose king was Razin.     At the beginning of this second faked part we have a king Razin of Damask (1 Kings, 11, 23ss) at the time of faked Solomon.  In the case in which we are before the same Razin of Damask, all the “history” of Israel/Jude  is a fake. When Hebrews were deported or escaped in Babylon and Egypt they could create a history of his  own having as coordinates the real but generic existence of names of Near East kings whom they did not spell correctly so to escape the accuse  of fake. Staying in Tanis (the ex capital of Libyan dynasties), Egypt, the followers of prophet Jeremy could be the involuntary source (by the intermediate of Baruch the scribe  gone to Babylon after the death of Jeremy) of the fake of the more ancient Hebrew “history”. Here they could read  or obtain the translation of the 400 years stele from which it resulted that Ramses II (about 1250 B.C.) celebrated the 400 anniversary of the foundation of Awaris capital of the Hyksos (the Israelite, Mosaic tradition, Biblical Jacob, Hyksos pharaoh, reigned about 1650 B.C., so 1650 – 1250 = 400), so they (the Aaron/Jahveh followers of Ezekiel) invented a 400 years slavery of Hyksos/Hebrews under Egyptians till they were expelled by Ramses II.



This is a disgusting fake, because  Hyksos were expelled by Roman pharaoh Ahmose at the end of XVI century. Ramses II worshipped Seth, the Hyksos god, so could not have expelled Hyksos (supposed to be Hebrews), since he  had the  same religion.  




The peace-treaty   in Accadian (diplomatic language) exchanged  between   Ramses II and Hattusili III.   


Ramses II (1279-1202 B.C.) is at the beginning of Troy war!  Ramses II (1279-1212) and Hattusili  III (1266-1236)  exchange (1259 B.C.) copies of a peace-treaty  contrary to the interests of Rome, since the Hittites were their enemies particularly in the vital-interest  Troy region.  In this time Romans are behind the Ahhiyawa/Achaeans  and their king (Polinikes), brother of Hetheocles. They were Roman procurators sent by Rome Government (see Kreon/Powerful). And Rome starts a  desert storm war against Near East. In the meantime Troy becomes under Hittite power so the war is symbolized by the  freedom of Troy by Odysseus from Hittite hands. The “Troy war” was not ten years lasting, but many decades. I think that in the game did enter the Assyrians with Tukulti-Ninurta   I, who in his first year of reign (1233) marched on Papanhi south of Issuwa, and conquered it. The Hittite king Tudhaliya IV, in response, proclaimed the embargo, that is prohibited Assyrians and Ahhiyawa to reach the Mediterranean sea.  In his 11th year of reign (1223) Tukulti-Ninurta conquered Babylon and took king Kastilias in chains to Assur. Tudhaliya IV assaulted Tukulti-Ninurta at Nihiriya but      the last won and won also over 40 local kings hi was fighting. Before the death of     Tudhaliya IV also Issuwa    was subdued to Assyria.  At this point we have the so called Sea peoples who attack Near East for the first time under Merenptah/Mineptah (1212-1202). They put all under iron (they are the Bible Philistines with iron charts and armours) and fire. Hatti and his vassals of Karkemish  and Ugarit are under attack and suffer famine. Merenptah in his second year of reign (1211) send great quantities of grain to Hatti (this proves the  peace-treaty still be observed against the Roman interests). Under Suppiluliumas II (1213-1190) Hattusa was destroyed by Romans and the Hittite kingdom ended. I see well the freedom of Troy by Odysseus beneath this scenario, before the fall of Hattusas.  All Eastern peoples were liars. I do not trust a word about the victory of Merenptah (and Ramses III) against Romans. The dramatic proof is the invasion of Egypt by Libyan peoples (under Merenptah and Ramses III) who will give life to the Tanis  Libyan dynasties XXI and XXII. Probably these dynasties (contemporary to the Hebrews kings starting from Salomon to Tiglath-Phalasar III) must be considered apart  from, and contemporary to Egyptian chronology from about Ramses III to the XXIV and XXVI Saite Egyptian dynasties. The general impression is that all Near East falls in complete misery and recession: Can we call this Dark Age in the sense that history continues with little or no archaeology documentation and only chronicles (but chronicles may be false if not sustained by archaeological proof)? Archaeological documentation cannot be a fake usually, while chronicles can be faked (also if impressed on clay instead of parchment). Or can we call this  400/500 years a space without history? I know that  my theory may be wrong (this time I admit to have been hazardous since the beginning, but  the fact is that the archaeological problem pointed out by Velikovsky is a real one and in my mind this is the case in which archaeology  must prevail on possibly faked written chronicles.  I find very important the expansion of Tukulti-Ninurta I Assyria corresponding with the expansion under Tiglath-Phalasar III (745-727; Romulus age) who conquered Babylon. The generic comparison of warriors dated in about 1200 B.C. Troy war and warriors dated about 750 Romulus age could be not decisive since immigrants in Italy came in every time. The curious is that apparently they come in these two wages. Why? Why they come at the beginning  (came backs, to Italy!, from which they sailed, after the Troy war) of the 400/500 years apparently without history and at the end (war lords who will colonize Tuscany and Venice, Italy from the two seas)? The impression is that if we put together the two ends of history we have the Roman fleet which  starts from Pyrgi, Cere, Ostia to the Levant,  destroys  Hatti, Egypt, Syria-Palestine, frees Troy and return  home. Not in 20 years like Odysseus, but in many travels go and return, in a space of  less than a century.  Odysseus has the same etymology of Hostus Hostilius, the real name of Romulus (from Rome; who founded Rome; it is not true, since Rome on Capital hill existed probably at least about 1600 B.C.; Romulus made a coup d’état and founded only monarchy). If Odysseus does not correspond to Romulus it is possible that Odysseus was an ancestor of Hostus Hostilius/Romulus and Tullus Hostilius, third Roman king. So Homer would have written Odyssey and Iliad for (the third) Roman king Tullus Hostilius, about the heroic freedom of Troy (a Roman city, nobody can deny it) by his ancestor Odysseus.  The fact that in every case Rome freed Troy and Homer was our poet in VII century signifies that we had culture and writing (Phaistos Disk, Linear B and alphabetic writing) in Dark Age too, but being so ancient the Troy freedom, I think Romans celebrated it so many times in the past (from 1200 circa) to be now an annoying argument. It would be different if Romulus were Odysseus/Hostilius, who freed Troy about 753 B.C. (corresponding about 1200 B.C.). I have said that Homer (or an ancestor of his) wrote in Iliad a passage about the war of Romulus against Titus Tatius king on Capital hill/Rome (transformed in the attack of Hector against Greek ships). And  in Odissey Odysseus against the pretenders is the replica of Romulus against the usurpers of his kingdom on Laure-Lavin. At that time Rome had two magistrates for kings (see the two Penates; Romulus and Remus,  Amulius and Numitor, the Consules, etc. etc. So Romulus was still living and actual in the Roman culture. Perhaps these passages were written for the celebration of Romulus’ coup d’état (749 B.C.) beginning the monarchy. Homer was not born at the time but as a  boy he could hear the stories of Romulus narrated by his youngest companions of arms. Homer wrote for Numa Pompilius (second Roman king) and Tullus Hostilius. The Iliad with the Horse full of Roman soldiers who by night opened the doors of the city and capture it, is another thing if Romulus Hostilius/Odysseus is the hero, and we comprehend that they dedicated to him also the Odyssey.  In 649 B.C. (Romans celebrated the saecula/centuries with “Olimpic” games, every … 1249, 1149, 1049, 949, 849, 749, 649  and so on) for the centenary of the freedom of Troy Homer wrote the Achilles’ Rage, the bulk of Iliad. The commissioner was Tullus Hostilius, third Roman king, descendant of Romulus, first king. After the Troy war Romulus was worshipped as a hero in the shape of a Penate, armed with shield and spear  in Lemnos  (comp. the Stele of Lemnos, VI century B.C., in Lemnian language, similar to Etruscan). The inscription mentions the city of Focea, with Lemnos in the area dominated by Troy. Romulus is sead death in the Tiber city at 54 years old. Now if the Stele of Lemnos is connected with Romulus, what has Romulus with the Troy region to do?  He went from Rome to Troy or came to Rome from Troy? At first I could not  grasp the connection of Romulus with Troy since nobody tells us, so I supposed that Romulus was a Lemnian language priest in the Atlantis/Roman last empire, having right to the government (he was able to know the will of the gods; so I taught of a two magistrates, one military, Titus Tatius for example, and one priestly, Romulus; and I think the same today, but now I think they changed periodically their functions; Romulus/Odysseus was probably the dux of the Roman army against Orient). After having grasped the bulk of my ten years     researches in various fields, I finally thought  to the possibility that Romulus/Odysseus caught Troy.  

My translation of the Silvius/Hylaios/Romulus  Lemnos’ Stele


Transcription: Front A:  aker tavarsio / vanala3ial seronai morinail / holaies naphoth / siasi  marasm av  3ialkhveis avis / evi3tho seronaith  sivai. Side B: holaiesi phokiasiale seronaith evi3tho toverona[l?] /  romh aralio /* sivai eptesio arai tis phoke */ sivai avis sialkhvis marasm avis romai.


Translation: A: Aker Tavarsio / gave (the stele) as a funerary gift  / * the  seventh year he  resided in Phokea. */ (A. T. the)  nephew of Hylaios (Silvius), / dead  (at the age of) fifty-four  years. / at the service of  Ephaistos (Vulcan)   lived. B: To Hylaios of Phokea / serf   of Ephaistos Tyberinos  / in  Rome, / at fifty-four  years old  dead in Rome.


I think now the part between asterisks has been added afterwards, and so in a odd position, but refers to Aker Tavarsio. So I lifted it in the right position in translation.


The Palladium tradition speaks of the founding of Troy by Romans. Pallade Athena was born in the Triton sea, that is the Thirrhenian sea or better the Tiber/Triton river who reverse itself in the Thyrrhenian sea. All our traditions were robbed to us  by Greeks, since our literature was in “Greek” and we exported it in Crete, Greece etc. but at the time of Tullus Hostilius we started to have a public literature in Latin (Greek changed in Latin trough Sabin influence) so will come the time Romans do not more write, speak an understand Greek language. And do not bother to ancient Roman empire being occupied to build  a new empire.   Our tradition (think of Apollodorus Bibliothec) was changed in  Greek tradition. Now the existence of 400/500 years of non-history (of the Greek made fake) is confirmed  by the false history put by Greeks before Romulus and from Romulus to the Troy war won by Odysseus (in the meantime transformed in a Greek hero). The time space between 1200 B.C. and 750 B.C. is a time probably faked in all antiquity from Rome to Babylon! Otherwise it would not be necessary to add  history to Rome, if it was a hut city founded by primitive pastors living with sheep not too different from Polyphemus. Instead the Greek centred legend tells of Aeneas, a Troy prince who after the fall of the city goes in search (of the Great Mother/Italy, that is the Land from which Troy was founded: Virgil, Aeneid) of a new land in which to live, and his son Ascanius founds Alba Longa and a day two noble princes  from Alba Longa, Romulus and Remus will found Rome. Thanks to Dionysius of Halykarnass I could understand that this was a Greek fake. For example the “good” grandfather Numitor was  in reality the bad one and kicked out Romulus and Remus to found a new city. Remus did not exist and was invented to represent the Greek community. Laure-Lavin was not the mother-city of Alba Longa, since the gods refused to transfer themselves to Alba Longa and in the night returned to Laure-Lavin. Aeneas  is sometimes connected directly to Romulus as his grandfather. Aeneas comes from Troy on ships full of soldiers.  So we must think at the come back of Odysseus/Hostilius on ships full of Shardana warriors, the praetorian guard of Romulus.   


The fake begins with  Tanis, capital of the Libyan dynasty XXII. After Ramses III (XX dyn.) Egypt falls in chaos. It is interesting that Deir el-Medina declines during the XIX and XX dyn. And was abandoned in the course of XXI dyn. Taharqa of XXV dyn., built there a chapel in honour of Osiris and Saites a tomb for the Divine Worshipper Ankhnesneferibra. My hypothesis is that XXI to XXII (parallel XXIII) Libyan dynasties be  not necessary  a fake but a mistake by Manetho or its interpreters, who included in the Egyptian dynasties chronology  foreign independent kingdoms like boundary German tribes under the Second Roman Empire. So these Libyan dynasties would be parallel and contemporary to Egyptian ones.

Saul and David were two Roman generals who created very little kingdoms of her owns.  It is curious that Saul the Roman general is taken as founder of Israel from which came the enemies, and David the enemy as king on Roman Jerusalem. Jerusalem was Roman since the Egyptian domination. Romans governed behind the Egyptians. Rama (“hill”) was a city founded by Romans with the same name of Rome. A second Rome. Priests like  to forge fakes. It is impossible that Jahveh priests (like Samuel) had a power upon Roman generals. They received orders only from the “Senate” see Kreon (Powerful, Roman king, procurator,  on Boeotian    Thebes), in the Phaistos Disk, 1350 B. C., something like *Kreyanes, which passing in Oriental dialects becomes Philistine *Serenes(?), a title, Seren (it seems English Sir), given to the chiefs   of Rome, and in every case at the time they worshipped Poseidon/Semitic Dagon, not Juppiter, Jovis/Jahveh imported probably by Romulus.   

Israel was ever fighting for his independence. Saul of Benjamin was 100% Roman general.   David (who cut the head of Goliath and took it to Jerusalem, 1 Samuel 17, 51-54) served under Philistines, so if he was not of Roman citizenship he was a Roman dressed warrior (note that 2 Samuel 21, 19 tells that Elhanan son of Jaare-Oreghim from Bethlehem killed Goliath from Gath).  It is possible that the heads of the traitors (they rebelled themselves to Roman government) Saul and his three sons where put in the temple of Dagon… in Jerusalem (1 Chronicles, 10,10; in Jerusalem was also a temple of Astarte to match with  1 Samuel, 31,10; note that the corpses where left in the battle camp as tells rightly 1 Chronicles, so the corpses of Saul and his sons appended to the walls of  Beisan of 1 Samuel is not credible; you think the frightened Hebrews would go and pull down the corpses? I do not; neither I think that Romans did such things to Romans, except for cutting the heads).  1 Samuel is not coherent with 2 Samuel. In the first Saul kills himself Roman stile falling on his sword. In the second aided by an Amalekite. David here and in  his elegy, and always,  shows his racist and cruel, and coward and homosexual  temperament only to cover his envy towards   Saul. In fact he was not present at the battle of Gilboa in which died heroically Saul and his sons. At this time Romans where victorious over their powerful rebel officers. David is a squalid bronze face,  a whitened sepulchre Pharisee, would be  a before time Machiavelli’s Prince, if he had courage. He sweeps  over the death of Saul and his sons but nevertheless he fights against the son of Saul, king of Israel, Is-Baal. I think that Israel and Jude were independent kingdoms since the beginning. So we understand that David was enemy of Saul  and surely  commissioned the murder of Is-Baal becoming for the first and only time king of all Israel. The separation of the two tribal constellations is proved by the rebellion of Absalom, Amasa and Sheba  for an independent Israel.

If we stay to the Bible they were always in war each other. There was never a Israelite united kingdom (of Israel and Jude). There was never a Israelite kingdom, since from Tiglath-Phalasar III to Sargon II, we have the end of Samaria (722 B.C.) and pseudo Israel kingdom. This presuppose (if the king list is authentic) a parallel Israelite kingdom like a parallel Libyan kingdom.  On the contrary a little life for Jude is possible. Unfortunately it seams that Judeans begin to worship Jahveh when they are at  their  end under Babylonian domination (fall of Jerusalem in 587 under Nabucodonosor II). Solomon is a pure fake based on XXII dyn. Libyan tradition of Tanis.  We know well that Egyptians never gave a daughter of  them to a foreign king. So only a Libyan woman could be given as wife to “Solomon”, whose story is that of an insignificant king of the desert. Think only about the visit of Shaba  Queen. Who was Shaba queen? A no one. Different would be if a big king of the time, from Babylon or Assyria or Egypt went to visit Solomon. Priests are clever and   trick you with enchanted words. The fabulous Solomon kingdom was invented on the Persian Trans-Euphratene, V  satrapy, that is Arabia, where Jerusalem was amongst other Arabic cities and peoples of different religion. The Israelite and Jude dynasties are probably substantially of Arabic desert sheiks, parallel and very similar to Libyan ones.  There are about 325 km from Tanis to Jerusalem, which we could consider the external margins of the Arabic nation.      

The designed heir king was from many indices  Adonia, not Solomon (see  1 Re 2, 15: “you know that I had right to the throne”; it was the complot of some of the court, especially the prophet Nathan, to give it to Solomon). Solomon made a coup d’état with the help of priests who at the time in Egypt too (also amongst the Libyans!) were called  prophets (also Minos/Jude/Abram and his son Ay/Joseph were Egyptian prophets), and with the help of mercenary Roman troops from Cere (now Cerveteri, under  Roman control), Ceretes and Peletes, under Benaia (under Joab they were on the side of David). I think they were in origin Shardana from Sardinia. We can see that always win the party  they sustain. So till now Rome kips (possibly) control of Jerusalem. I think it possible that Atlantis (that is first Roman empire) ships from Tartessos in Spain  took to  “Solomon” goods from the Americas.       

The “history” of Israel and Jude is well faked by clever priests, but why we find so few inscriptions of Phoenicia and Syria, even Moab and Edom, and nothing about so big kingdoms like Israel and Jude?  For a time from Ramses II to Tiglath-Phalasar III?  I could not be sure of Phoenicia and Syria history, why would I believe in Israel and Jude one?

Different is the case of Assyrian inscriptions: Here I must treat Egyptian and Assyrian chronology. Manetho, we know, was criticized by Hebrews and ought to find in Egyptian history traces of Hebrew one. Probably in those times of decline history was quite bad known and always priests try to submit history to religion. It is possible that influenced by Hebrews protests and in a time (III century B. C.) in which Greek (by Macedonians kings) overwhelmed culture,  Alexandria of Egypt (where Hebrews translated the Bible in Greek) became a fake centre creating the predominance of Greek culture peoples. With a big history  behind  it was simple to understand the present big empire.   So it is possible Manetho considered the Libyan dynasties subsequent to XIX and XX till Ramses III dynasties and not contemporary and independent from the Egyptian, who continues with the Saite (XXIV) dynasty (Romulus age).  Assyria probably was forced likely to follow this chronology but  curiously  in 1223 Tukulti-Ninurta I (1233-1197) destroyed Babylon and took his king, the god Marduk, and part of population to Assyria.  Similarly Tiglath-Phalasar III (Romulus age)  in 729 took Babylon and became his king with the name of Pulu. From now on Greece had a (for me completely faked) history going back to the Troy war won by Odysseus lifted from Rome to Ithaca, a ignoble apart land in the  Adriatic  area of so called Pelasgi (a non-Greek language people).  Rome, occupied in recreating an empire had too little time to write history and to read it.  Clever Greeks told us our history before Romulus, that is the coming back  of Aeneas (see Aeneus founder of Calidon/Rome)  from Troy in flames and the founding of Alba Longa by his son Ascanius. From Alba Longa a day would come Romulus and Remus of noble descent and found Rome. Summing up all my researches I realised the possible identity Odysseus 1200 circa (some traditions made him linked with Rome)/Romulus, about 753 B.C. So in the hands of clever Greeks our Odysseus (we were the first to speak Greek and imported it in Greece, Crete, etc.) was split in two and the same fact of Troy war was put 400/500 years before its real time, the time of Romulus, creating 400/500 years of dark archaeological  history (where Greek speaking and culture-centred peoples  — from Greece to Babylon put if my theory is right, about 400/500 years of false history to appear more ancient).

So we the Roman people of Atlantis, who subjugated all Mediterranean sea and Near East at the end of XVI century (about 1070 B.C. New Chronology) and who destroyed them (Egypt, Hatti, Syria-Palestine) about 1200 (753 circa New Chron.) were put out of history. The consequence of Roman   invasion was the expansion of Assyrians. Greeks and Hebrews were and felt them as the twin faces of the same (false) coin. Nevertheless they (Solon) in Sais capital of XXIV and XXVI dynasties heard probably  about  the true story of Atlantis but  (Platon) falsely modified it to make Athens a big power and obscure the  actual existence of Atlantis Rome (in decline but still living), merging Atlantis in the Atlantic Ocean (a true damnatio memoriae). Athens is nothing in the Homeric poems and little thing in the Mycenaean/Roman age. Our Thyrrheni of the three sacred isles (Italy/Ausonia, Sardinia and Sicily)  became Adriatic Pelasgi of non Indo-European, pre-Greek language, while in the Bible it is more simple to identify Philistines (and Benjamin tribe)  with Romans (they speak a Greek-like language,  worship Poseidon/Dagon, have legions of 3000 men and 300 chariots,  their battle symbol is the wolf, their marriages are under the aspect of taking away the girls).   Now it is obvious that our chronology is not perfect  so we must take with care the destruction of Babylon by Tukulti-Ninurta I in 1223 B.C. This fact could be connected to the conquest of Troy by Romans. The Hittite king Tudhaliya IV (1236-1215) seems contemporaneous to the Troy war. So under Merenptah (1212-1202) we have the first  wave of the Roman Sea peoples against Egypt, Hatti and Syria-Palestine. It is here that Troy is taken by Romans while Hatty is completely destroyed. Under Suppiluliumas II (1214-1190). We can take 1200 B.C. as the approximate date of Troy conquest by Romans. That is 753 B. C. approximately.

This is only a proposal. Final solution can only come from single sectors of research which confirm from all points of view (Assyrian, Babylonian, Hatti, Greece, etc. etc.) somehow these picture, that is fakes in various Near East chronologies and king lists.



The End




ATTENZIONE! Avete creato o avete intenzione di creare un sito con contenuti seri, scientifici, o cui comunque tenete particolarmente, sull’insieme,, Telecomitalia? NON FATELO! Tutti i miei lavori (frutto di anni di lavoro intenso) postati sul sito di questo GESTORE INFEDELE, XOOMER.IT:

sono stati rimossi insieme al sito stesso senza alcun preavviso e motivazione. Non pensavo minimamente che potesse accadere un’assurdità simile, ed è per ciò che il fatto mi ha colto di sorpresa. Quando me ne sono accorto e ho reclamato, la motivazione dei tecnici (perché solo da loro ho ricevuto risposta) è stata che non usavo il sito da tempo! Cioè non inserivo nuovi lavori… Queste teste di cazzo non capiscono che non sono io a dover frequentare il mio sito, ma gli utenti, voi,  che vi ci collegate e che in ogni tempo trovate lavori da consultare, per sempre. E pensare che questa storia da incubo iniziò quando mi arrivarono delle e-mail di Telecomitalia che  mi… pregava di postare i miei lavori su, e io stupidamente accettai.