The chronology revisionism of Gunnar Heinsohn and Laurent Guyenot and its implications for the history of Frisia

[Helgiteut]

This is only a thought of mine, early in the making, but maybe Anno Domini is going back to Diocletian. Anno Domini begins 65 years before the failed siege of Jerusalem by Cestius Gallus, and Anno Diocletian begins 68 years before the failed siege of Jerusalem by Constantius Gallus.
(The link is to a pdf that begins to download when clicked, from Qmag, an archive for Heinsohn's journals)
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=htt ... AdAAAAABAE
So Anno Domini would mean in the year of "Diocletian Our Lord" and not of "Jesus Our Lord". (The three year gap could be accounted for on the grounds that the date for Jesus' birth is thought to have been "2 B.C." by some chronologers.)

Heinsohn believed that Eusebius, Lactantius and Jerome writing from before "284-351 A.D" onwards as well as Josephus, Tacitus, and Philostrates when writing from "1-66 A.D." onwards, are telling of the same events from different perspectives, with CESTIVS GALLVS being the same man as CONSTANTIVS GALLVS. If one doubts Josephus as being a medieval forgery, it is still likely that the medieval forger copied the history of Eusebius for his own Jewish wars. In both cases, however, the A.D 1-96 years can be removed from the history books as either corroborations of simultaneous events, or as medieval forgeries based on 284-379. Either way, that's an odd but handy 284 years taking us closer to Antiquity. So based on this alone without further revision, we are at most within the years 1823-1826 A.D. Heinsohn also removed a further 400 years from before year 930, though to remove them is less surgical than with the afore mentioned revisions, giving no clear date for where we are now. For now I am happy with this small win agains't the meddling of the Magus, knowing I am at least 284 years closer to the days of yore.