So /his/. Who is the biggest meme historian? Gavin Menzies,

>>1681326
meme historian,
no chomsky?

impressive

>>1681326
From those three, Menzies. He outright invents shit while Cahill and Zinn just cherrypick and exaggerate things which actually happened.

Honourable mention for Niall Ferguson.

>>1681335
Lol I'm not saying you have to agree with the three listed. I'm actually asking for more suggestions with a short explanation why. Sorry for not making that clear.

However if you do agree with the three a short explanation why would be good as well.

>>1681326

Victor Davis Hansen.

And the problem is, he has the talent to be an actually good historian. He actually really does know history. But he ALWAYS has to draw a parallel between 4th-6th century Greece and modern political units, and it's always this autistic, one to one despite not really syncing up, correspondence.

>>1681353
Interesting.

>>1681351
whats a meme?

>>1681371
Look at some of the historians i mentioned and others mentioned in this thread. Might give you an idea.

>>1681340

Niall Ferguson is pretty solid though, especially his early stuff.

Popular historians are a meme which should die already.

>>1681326
Anatoly Fomenko
>According to New Chronology, the traditional chronology consists of four overlapping copies of the "true" chronology shifted back in time by significant intervals with some further revisions. Fomenko claims all events and characters conventionally dated earlier than 11th century are fictional, and represent "phantom reflections" of actual Middle Ages events and characters, brought about by intentional or accidental mis-datings of historical documents. Before the invention of printing, accounts of the same events by different eyewitnesses were sometimes retold several times before being written down, then often went through multiple rounds of translating and copyediting. Names were translated, mispronounced and misspelled to the point where they bore little resemblance to originals. According to Fomenko, this led early chronologists to believe or choose to believe that those accounts described different events and even different countries and time periods. Fomenko justifies this approach by the fact that, in many cases, the original documents are simply not available: Fomenko claims that all the history of the ancient world is known to us from manuscripts that date from the 15th century to the 18th century, but describe events that allegedly happened thousands of years before, the originals regrettably and conveniently lost. For example, the oldest extant manuscripts of monumental treatises on Ancient Roman and Greek history, such as Annals and Histories, are conventionally dated c. AD 1100, more than a full millennium after the events they describe, and they did not come to scholars' attention until the 15th century.[citation needed] According to Fomenko, the 15th century is probably when these documents were first written.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Chronology_(Fomenko)

File: chariots-of-the-gods.jpg (74KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 720x540px

Erich von Däniken

File: Therealofficalreadinglistofhis.png (2MB, 996x1190px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 996x1190px

>>1681326

>>1681326
>>1681335
>Chomsky
>Zinn
>meme historians

File: The_Evil_Empire_Cover.jpg (40KB, 317x475px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 317x475px

>>1682849
Someone who may tell me about this?

>>1682849
>no guns, germs and steel