Alternative histories

There have always been those whose view of the past differs from that of mainstream scholars, whose alternative histories have been produced within the academic tradition, even if these scholars are seen as eccentrics or mavericks. The American Professor Robert Eisenmann, whose reading of the Dead Sea Scrolls as documents of early opponents of St Paul, falls into this category. A second group works with a perspective that generally derives from a particular philosophical or political viewpoint (such as Marxism, Zionism or fascism) and sometimes it contains genuinely new and exciting insights. A good example of this category is … There is a third group, who propose radical restructuring of chronologies (à la Velikovsky or à la David Rohl), unusual modes of explanation that include radical catastrophism (à la Velikovsky again) and the merging of separate characters such as King Arthrwys of Gwent and ‘King Arthur’ (à la Blackett & Wilson). Many of them share the arrogant assumption that they are trailblazers who have uncovered “The Truth about...”, whose work is destined to be ignored by the majority, usually because of the alleged jealousy of mainstream scholars. Generally the reason why mainstream scholars ignore their work is much more simple: despite what many people believe, academics do not have the time to read rubbish!

This part of the site will look at some of these characters to see if they have anything new and useful to offer the mainstream.

Under construction!