Home > Science > The Atlantis Chronicles Forgotten. The Hispano-Romans authors.

The Atlantis Chronicles Forgotten. The Hispano-Romans authors.

Added: (Mon Aug 29 2005)

Pressbox (Press Release) -

The Atlantis Chronicles Forgotten. The Hispano-Romans authors.

By Georgeos Diaz-Montexano.

The Petrus’s Chronicon of Caesar Augusta, Zaragoza, Spain and the Dex’tro Chronicon (attributed to century IV AD)



This Chronicon, attributed to Petrus de Caesar Augusta (Zaragoza, Spain), about century IV AD, it treats on old history from Spain to way of the style of medieval chronicles, that is to say, a successive chronological exhibition with additional data on the reign of each personage and his main landmarks, profits or events. As all the medieval chronicles of Christian authors use the system of Biblical chronology with few differences. The period that includes the Chronicón starts off from year 525 after the Biblical deluge to the 40 after Jesus Christ.

Let us see next a summary in Spanish of the data that are exposed in Latin medieval in text of the Chronicón de Petrus de Caesar Augusta.

This Chronicón establishes in Iberia a called monarchy Atlantic Atlantean and, that dominated in all the peninsula, in France, Italy, Africa, in many islands of the Mediterranean and the Ocean; and until in America (which is deduced across by the mention of colonies in the continent of the Ocean). And raising in the time, above, until the time in which the sacreds writings speak of Abraham, east Chronicón says, that in Iberia ten kings had reigned already, and was reigning eleventh that is, the king number 11. One affirms in this Chronicón that Tharssîs (Tharte or Tartessos), was the first king of the dynasty of the Atlantic ones that reigned in Iberia and its reign lasted 105 years, having died when it had turned the 514 years of age. A son his was called Hêbêr (from where it derives Hebro, Heber, Hiberia and the town of the Hebrews of Israel and Egypt); Heber was son of Thârssis and it reigned during 78 years. Bosphôros or Neptune, or Hippio (that in Greek is translated as "of the horsemen or horse-race"), reigned 50 years. Neptune or Hippio had like son second a one Gadeírico call and also Eumêlo (as it affirms Plato) that it reigned 100 years. After Gadeírico Bebrîcê reigned and its Cotîna daughter 29 years (of Cotîna it would derive an old name from Gadeira that was Cotinousa that is, Island of Cotî or Cotîna Hercules son-in-law of Bebrîcê - because one married with a daughter of this Pirêne call - a year reigned only (apparently it was a transition or step reign). Horos (seems the same name of the Hôrus of Egyptian), also called the Uranîo one, and that was older son of Hercules, it reigned 72 years. Hiperión reigned 6 years. Atlante (that is, Atlas), Hiperión brother, reigned 48 years. Hêsperos son of Atlante, only reigned 2 years. Later Pâna happened to him brother of Atlante (or Atlas), of that says the Chronicón de Petrus de Caesar Augusta that he derived the name from Hispan or Hispania (island or peninsula of Pân or Panîa Until the mentioned Pâna it lasted in Iberia and all its colonies the Atlantean monarchy of the line or dynasty that established Tharsis (or Tartessos), his founder. When one was reigning the last descending king of Atlantic dynastic forward edge or Atlantean, the mentioned Pâna the Chronicón de Petrus says that was born Abraham Patriarch. It altogether affirms the same Chronicón, that, the time passed from Thârssis (or Tartessos), until arriving at king Pâna it was of 491 years. Abraham esteem that lived between the 2166 and 1991 BC, then the kingdom of the dynasty of the Atlanteans, in European Iberia and all its colonies, African and Americans, 2657-2482 BC had to begin around the year, that is to say, in the Total Bronze.

From Pâna it is also continued showing the Hispanic-Atlantean monarchy of Iberia like a succession expanded of monarchs who gave settlers to England, Scotland and Ireland, and the continent across of the Ocean (America). The Atlanteans sent from Iberia colonists that gave name to Eastern Iberia (Iberia of the Caucasus or Georgia). They had underneath its dominion all Libya, in Africa. They gave kings Celts of present France. And it affirms the Chronicón that was descendants hers the kings of the famous Troy. Also one demonstrates (by means of appointment of other old authors) of how the Hispanic-Atlanteans they occupied by many years to Sicily, and as they populated and they founded the great city of Rome, that many later got to be head of the world. One affirms that all the fable and the gentilities mythology of the Greek world, phoenician and Roman had his source and origin in kings and true princes who were of Iberia; of luck, that almost all whatever were adored as Gods in all the idolatry of the old world were (unravelled the veil of its mythical narrations) monarchs Hispanic-Atlanteans who occupied the throne of the Iberias, or children or grandsons his that founded with their lines new monarchies.

Of all the narrated one in Petrus's Chronicon from Caesar Augusta (IV AD), the proposal concludes of which Iberia, in the oldest times, was the head and lady of all West, extending its empire by all Europe through the Gallia’s, Italy, Germany, England and Ireland, and by all Africa through the Mauritanias earth that touched part of the Mediterranean (Morocco), and by the Ocean until the kingdom of the Congo, and by old Libya, until Egypt, occupying many of the African deserts, and in America many places of the South to North.

It affirms the publisher of the first edition of the Chronicón de Petrus de Caesar Augusta Francîsco Xavîer dê lâ Huêrta î Vêga:
Quote:
"... This was Iberia in its principles: all these expanded countries must or their population, or its government, or his to him first kings; and the proof of all it is the subject of this work... "


Before leaving published the work dê lâ Huerta î Vêga, "Primitive Spain, history of its Kings and Monarchs from its population to Christ" (1738), where it was published and commented the Chronicón de Petrus de Caesar Augusta for the first time it underwent a terrible censorship on the part of some orthodox, defending Christians of the religious truth and the Christian faith. It last more of all was Gregorîo Mâya'ns and Siscar that with absurd arguments based on the Bible and the Christian faith, and a noticeable ignorance on the Latin of the time attributed to the Chronicón, century IV AD (the same time of Chalcidio) tried to avoid at all costs that the work was published requesting the Maxima condemn on the same one to which it called abominable and hateful work and that considered dangerous highly. Its censorship was on the verge of outside obtaining that the condemned as it builds heretics, but for the pressures of the Academy of History and of most of the intellectuals of the time who thought in the antiquity of the same one and thanks also to the real house that allowed its publication. But Mâya'ns did not surrender and their pressures were so great that it obtained that never more re returned to publish this work of the publishers dê lâ Huerta and Vêga, on the Chronicón de Petrus.

Between the arguments that Gregorîo used Mâya'ns is those of religious type like the chronological differences and other questions of religious interpretation, that from the scientific or historical point of view do not deserve to discuss to be absolutely subjective arguments. Other arguments, that we could consider philological in fact they are errors of interpretation of Mâya'ns which they demonstrate a ignorance of the a Christian and Neo-Platonism literary style and the grammar forms of the orators and interpreters of the time of Petrus, that is to say, century IV AD, that is the same time of others like San Augustine and Chalcidio. And the third group of arguments is the based ones on the personal credibility, that is to say, it uses like main argument, to discredit the work, indeed that in her are some coincidences with the Atlantis de Plato, who according to Mâya'ns is a mere fable that is, an invented history. I do not believe that it is necessary to abound on tremendously absurd and little scientific thing that is to resort to this last type of argument.

Let us see some examples of arguments based on the ignorance of the old sources:

Speaking of the author of the Chronicón de Petrus Mâya'ns say:


Quote:
"…De Estrabón sólo se vale para decir osadamente que no entendió al poeta Anacreonte, i para dar por verdadero lo que Estrabón no se atrevió a decir en su propia cabeza: como que los españoles tuvieron leyes escritas quarenta i tres años antes que naciesse Abrahán, i más de quinientos años [Pág. 273] antes que el pueblo de Dios tuviesse escritos los Diez Mandamientos, que es lo mismo que decir, la lei natural…" (Carta Manuscrita de Mâya’ns, enviada al rey de España, 1739)



Quote:
"... Strabo, it is only used to say, boldly, that Strabo did not understand Anacreonte poet, to give by true what Strabo did not dare to think about its own head: because the Spaniards were written laws 43 years old before born Abraham, and dwells than five hundred years before the town of God had writings the Ten Orders, that plows just like to say, the natural law... ".


This false argument against the veracity of the Chronicón de Petrus combines, on the one hand, the dogmas of the Christian religious faith and by another one, the ignorance of Mâya'ns that did not know that it existed a fragment of Strabo where it was spoken of the great antiquity of the writing of the Turdetanians or Tartessians . So that at the time in which Mâya'ns wrote this censorship, in Spain not yet knew the edition the work of Strabo where it appeared that precious reference on the antiquity of Iberia as cradle of civilizations. In fact, the antiquity that offers Strabo is much greater than the one than it offers Petrus being based on Strabo and Anacreonte. It is very probable that Petrus, the being a Christian author was seen of certain forced way reduce the dates of Strabo to make fit them a little with the accepted Biblical chronology. In any case, that appointment of the Chronicón de Petrus, used by Mâya'ns to refute its authenticity is exactly one of the greater evidences in favor of the authenticity of the same one. In the Chronicón de Petrus it is mentioned like consulted sources or of support - in addition to a Strabo - to Homero, Hesiodo, Anacreonte, Plato, Asclepiades Mirleano, Josephus African Julio, and Eusebio Caesariense (among known others less).

Petrus de Caesar Augusta he appears mentioned by another contemporary Christian author, San Geronimo who it says of Petrus, "insigne and masterful of oratory". This same author was also first in mentioning a work - at the moment missing - titled "Universal History" of a Roman author called Dêx'tro. The codices of this attributed work to Dêx'tro was published in Spain, for the first time in 1525, by a called friar Juan de Rihuerga, of the monastery of San Francisco de Paula, but the pressure of the censorship avoided that the work was printed and disclosed then, although did not avoid that many historians used themselves these manuscripts to include the data of the Chronicón de Dêx'tro which they are very similar to of Petrus, mainly in relation to the chronology of the kings of the Hispanic-Atlantean empire; for example, in the Chronicón de Dêx'tro (at the moment disappeared just as the manuscripts of Petrus), becomes memory of some kings of Iberia whose names agree with mentioned others in the Chronicón de Petrus, these are: Abîdo (the same Abîs Abîdes of other old authors), Mnesteo (similar to the Mnesêas or Mneseus de Plato), Éga, Medôn Paledôn Ba'rcâba, Balîo and Colcâ to this last one attributes to the invention of the iron and the colonization to him of the Colchis.

Deceiving the censorship another friar, Juan Calderón, published an edition of the Chronicón de Dêx'tro in Zaragoza, 1619. This Castilian edition - it affirms - was based on a copy on Latin of the year 1594, that had been made on a very old gothic unit; of the sort, probably of centuries IV to VII the AD. Nevertheless, at the present time, like it happened with the manuscripts of the Chronicón de Petrus, this work also is in missing state. Being the oldest edition, the edition mentioned one of Calderón of 1619. Whereas the Chronicón de Petrus, the edition older than is known are manuscripts that saw and study the same Gregorîo censor Mâya'ns in the Library of the king, apparently - if there are to believe in the speculations of Gregorio Mâya'ns - it was a copy of first half of century XVII, but as its interest were to discredit the work, he is not very trustworthy this dating that it offers. And this manuscript - always according to Mâya'ns - it appears a note written by hand above that it says:

"…Ex pervetusto vetusto exemplari […] Petri Caesaraugustani Oratoris Chronicon Regum seu Imperatorum Hispaniae…" That is, that this note affirms that it is a very old unit, and that the work was titled: "Chronic of the Kings or Emperors of Hispania", Petrus the Orator, the city of Caesar Augusta (Zaragoza, Spain). In any case, this manuscript mentioned by Mâya'ns, its detractor, it demonstrates the existence of the Chronicón in a document that could well be a copy of another much more old unit as it used to happen in the Medieval Age with most of old texts.

Reuniting all dispersed fragments in multiple medieval authors of Hispanic-Roman, nonsingle origin of both Chronic mentioned, Petrus and Dêx'tro but also of other authors like Flavio Dêx'tro (surely is the same Dêx'tro), Mârcos Mâ'ximo, San Braulîôn Hélêca, Hau'bêrto Hispalênse, Berôsos, and Georgeos Síncêlo, among others, I have managed to reconstruct all the old history of Iberia that the official sources have condemned the ostracism. A history that demonstrates at least something unquestionable and very revealing for the old history of the Mediterranean, and in special of the West of Europe, Iberia and Morocco; it demonstrates that idea was common between many chronists and authors medieval, from first centuries A.D., that the Peninsula of Iberia had been the same Island or Peninsula that Plato it denominated like Atlantic or Atlantis, and that from Iberia more likely expanded the civilization by almost all Europe to Asia and by almost all Africa or Libya to Egypt and to same America.

It is certain that some differences with respect to Plato exist, but this does not have to be seen like an argument in against but to favor. Also differences between the Atlantis de Diodorus Siculus and the Atlantis de Plato or between the references of Atlantis de Theopompus exist with respect to the Atlantis de Plato. The truely important thing, is that all of them, like the Atlantis de Petrus and Déxtrô speak of an empire of the West of Europe, next to the Atlantic, that Petrus and Dextrô they need to be same Iberia. On the other hand, the differences between all these versions of Atlantis can be a firm evidence of the existence of an old original document that would be same that would use the all those authors or the existence of a tradition who were gathered by all of them of independent way, which would explain because Diodorus Siculus does not mention Plato. In any case, this belongs to the field of the mere speculation and we must work with data, that is to say, with the documents that we arrange, not with suppositions.

This Hispanic-Roman medieval codices of the first centuries of the Christian era - today disappeared -, but that has survived in many medieval authors who enjoyed rigor and authority at their times, constitute the greater evidence than it can exist (excepting archaeological) of which when Plato affirmed that Atlantis were an island or peninsula that a region had, or extreme part, denominated Gadeira, that arrived until the Pillars of Hercules, Plato was speaking - without a doubt some - of the only island or peninsula in all West of the Mediterranean that had that region and those Pillars of Hercules, that is, Iberia or same Hispania.

Although perverse hands, floods of hatred and religious fanaticism, have made disappear the original codices - apparently written between centuries IV to VII the AD - cannot ignore the reality of which these Chronicons they appear mentioned in many medieval authors of centuries XV, XVI, and XVII of recognized prestige by his rigor and service the historical truth. It does not have either to forget that most of texts or manuscripts older than they are conserved of most of the Greek and Roman classic authors, and medieval until dates previous to century V AD, are copies written in centuries XIV, XV and XVI AD. The own texts of Plato, Strabo, Herodotos, Homero, and of the immense majority of the most illustrious authors of the antiquity, of whose authenticity nobody doubt, is - in its majority - copies made in centuries XIV and XV, although it is possible to be demonstrated - by means of paleographical criteria - that became on others older writings between centuries V and IX AD. This same one could happen, perfectly, with the codices of centuries XV and XVI of Chronicles of Dêx'tro and Petrus, among others.

Any firm, solid and unquestionable evidence does not exist, that allows to doubt the true antiquity that was granted to works of these Hispanic-Roman authors who we have analyzed. Since we have seen, in the same way that the original codices do not exist (that is, they have disappeared) that served as it bases of copies of medieval texts of Plato, and this never has served like argument to doubt the antiquity and authenticity of such, cannot doubt then the antiquity and authenticity of the codices Hispano-Romans de Petrus and Dêx'tro, only because the information spilled in these does not fit with the vision of Biblical history or with the vision of unique accepted Official History like true and possible.

I have seted out to reconstruct and to group in a great work to all these authors dispersed in many others that could escape to the terrible censorship of the imperial catholic religion. One "Opera Magna" that, in tribute to its authors, I have decided to title: "Hispaniae Oblitos Scriptores. Chronicon Regum seu Imperatorum Iberiae seu Atlantida…", that is to say, "Of the Spain's Forgotten Writers: Chronicon of the Kings or Emperors of Iberia or Atlantis". If all affluent pass, I hope to be able to finish this work with all the manuscripts - written in Latin medieval - that I have found, for end of the 2005. I hope that the censorship (that unfortunately still it exists), in this occasion, she is more generous with my work and allows its total and it frees public diffusion. By the well-being of Science and the Historical Truth, that I hope... "

[end of the extract of the chapter on “the Hispanic-Roman old authors”, of the Georgeos Diaz Montexano’s Book. Atlantis Scientific: a Ibero-Mauritanean Empire of the Bronze Age, 2000-2004]

Source: http://www.laAtlantida.info
http://DiscoveryAtlantis.sytes.net

Submitted by:DiscoveryAtlantis.sytes.net
Disclaimer: Pressbox disclaims any inaccuracies in the content contained in these releases. If you would like a release removed please send an email to remove@pressbox.co.uk together with the url of the release.