>>21349727>Church history is most likely to be entirely made up and we have rock solid (sometimes literally) evidence for it. We know of mass forgeries, from documents to art.>Our time is simply not ready for recognition, similar to the holocaust narrative.Every single piece of physical evidence presented by the church for the existence of jesus turned out to be fake, yes. Anything that goes beyond that is still up to debate, maybe the Vatican archives will be opened to the public, by force or otherwise, then he might learn more.
>that's a North European projection, given that we simply don't have a useful chronology and work from an entirely faulty premise, ie the bible.Not sure what you mean by "north European projection".
>in all likelyhood Greece was mostly a shithole and early medieval insular Greeks were culturally enriched by Normans Ancient Greece was the cradle of philosophy, logic, and arts, with ideas that shaped Roman thought and culture. The Romans did not simply inherit a "retconned" history, they engaged deeply with Greek philosophy, literature, and art, refining and elevating these traditions in their own context. The exchange between (compatible) cultures is not a matter of mere enrichment or copying, it is a dynamic interplay where ideas evolve and adapt, something the Romans were masters at. the renaissance certainly saw a revival of classical ideas, it was also an opportunity to re-examine and reintegrate traditions that had survived, rather than a mere skewing of history.
There is a lack of written historical accounts due to the sack of Rome by the Gauls, but the patterns of cultural exchange do in fact reveal an ongoing dialogue that shaped both Roman art and philosophy. Asserting that Romans were indifferent to art contradicts the wealth of artistic and architectural achievements that define their civilization. Continuity does exist, albeit in nuanced forms.