What do you think?
Rate this book
Newton's Revised History of Ancient Kingdoms - A Complete Chronology
One of history's most brilliant men brings order to the chaos of early chronology. Sir Isaac Newton corrects many errors about the early history of civilizations.
205 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 1988
67 people are currently reading
458 people want to read
About the author
Isaac Newton
945 books868 followersSir Isaac Newton, FRS , was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, and alchemist. His Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, is considered to be the most influential book in the history of science. In this work, Newton described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. Newton showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of the differential and integral calculus. He also demonstrated the generalised binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
Newton was also highly religious (though unorthodox), producing more work on Biblical hermeneutics than the natural science he is remembered for today.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society asking who had the greater effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.
In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound.
In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of the differential and integral calculus. He also demonstrated the generalised binomial theorem, developed the so-called "Newton's method" for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series.
Newton was also highly religious (though unorthodox), producing more work on Biblical hermeneutics than the natural science he is remembered for today.
In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society asking who had the greater effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed much more influential than Albert Einstein.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
March 4, 2020
Book Review of The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, by Isaac Newton
A few years ago, I discovered Russian topologist Anatoly Fomenko’s “New Chronology,” a revision of accepted chronology wherein he postulates that events attributed to the civilizations of the Roman Empire, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt were “phantom copies” of what actually occurred in the Middle Ages. These “phantom copies” were assigned various dates and locations by contemporary priests and scholars, which were misdated by centuries and millennia, and thus incorporated into conventional chronology. There are a number of chronological revisionists, but I was surprised to see Isaac Newton among them.
In The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, Newton first provides a brief chronicle of the events between early European history and Alexander the Great’s conquest of Persia, and then discusses the chronology of the Greeks, the Empires of Egypt and Assyria, the contemporary Empires of the Babylonians and Medes, the constitution of Solomon’s Temple and finally the Persian Empire. Each era is contrasted with biblical chronology, which is essentially constructed from the extensive genealogies from the biblical patriarchs to the judges and kingdoms of the Bible, on which Newton founds his analysis, surprisingly enough.
Given Newton’s stature as the paragon of science, his reliance on the Bible as an authoritative historical document is curiously disassociated from his work in astronomy, optics, physics and other various sciences. Though I am skeptical of Newtonian physics, the theoretical infallibility with which modern science ascribes to him contrasts remarkably with its regard for biblical history, which is considered to be mere mythology, if not outright fiction, by that same community. Nevertheless, Newton unhesitatingly relies upon biblical history to formulate his fundamental hypothesis—that conventional chronology is ultimately corrupted by miscalculation and the careless methods historians used to outline and define eras, which he suggests were extended to proportional absurdity and vastly misrepresent the length of each thereof.
Newton recounts how Egyptian priests ascribed fixed timespans to eras, generations and kingdoms, rather than through scientific method. For example, one-hundred years is prefigured as three generations in their calculation, so rather than consult historical records and horoscopes, they defaulted to their prefiguration, which Newton posits as the fundamental problem with their chronology, and attributes it to the desire to appear historically magnanimous. Given the scope of the histories of these cultures and empires, such misrepresentations leave many hundred- and some thousand-year gaps that are otherwise unintelligible chronologically.
As a student of the Bible, my opinion of Isaac Newton has dramatically changed and I now view him as a vastly misunderstood man, who, though not infallible, was truly a man after the Truth, however unconventional his route thereto. However incomprehensive his analysis may be in The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, he presents a remarkably strong case for the incomprehensibility of contemporary chronology, as well as the general authoritativeness of biblical history, which in contrast to the records of the Greeks, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, is undeniably more reasonable and far more extensive generally.
A few years ago, I discovered Russian topologist Anatoly Fomenko’s “New Chronology,” a revision of accepted chronology wherein he postulates that events attributed to the civilizations of the Roman Empire, Ancient Greece and Ancient Egypt were “phantom copies” of what actually occurred in the Middle Ages. These “phantom copies” were assigned various dates and locations by contemporary priests and scholars, which were misdated by centuries and millennia, and thus incorporated into conventional chronology. There are a number of chronological revisionists, but I was surprised to see Isaac Newton among them.
In The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, Newton first provides a brief chronicle of the events between early European history and Alexander the Great’s conquest of Persia, and then discusses the chronology of the Greeks, the Empires of Egypt and Assyria, the contemporary Empires of the Babylonians and Medes, the constitution of Solomon’s Temple and finally the Persian Empire. Each era is contrasted with biblical chronology, which is essentially constructed from the extensive genealogies from the biblical patriarchs to the judges and kingdoms of the Bible, on which Newton founds his analysis, surprisingly enough.
Given Newton’s stature as the paragon of science, his reliance on the Bible as an authoritative historical document is curiously disassociated from his work in astronomy, optics, physics and other various sciences. Though I am skeptical of Newtonian physics, the theoretical infallibility with which modern science ascribes to him contrasts remarkably with its regard for biblical history, which is considered to be mere mythology, if not outright fiction, by that same community. Nevertheless, Newton unhesitatingly relies upon biblical history to formulate his fundamental hypothesis—that conventional chronology is ultimately corrupted by miscalculation and the careless methods historians used to outline and define eras, which he suggests were extended to proportional absurdity and vastly misrepresent the length of each thereof.
Newton recounts how Egyptian priests ascribed fixed timespans to eras, generations and kingdoms, rather than through scientific method. For example, one-hundred years is prefigured as three generations in their calculation, so rather than consult historical records and horoscopes, they defaulted to their prefiguration, which Newton posits as the fundamental problem with their chronology, and attributes it to the desire to appear historically magnanimous. Given the scope of the histories of these cultures and empires, such misrepresentations leave many hundred- and some thousand-year gaps that are otherwise unintelligible chronologically.
As a student of the Bible, my opinion of Isaac Newton has dramatically changed and I now view him as a vastly misunderstood man, who, though not infallible, was truly a man after the Truth, however unconventional his route thereto. However incomprehensive his analysis may be in The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, he presents a remarkably strong case for the incomprehensibility of contemporary chronology, as well as the general authoritativeness of biblical history, which in contrast to the records of the Greeks, Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Medes and Persians, is undeniably more reasonable and far more extensive generally.
April 4, 2019
Read like a telephone directory
February 23, 2014
Long and dull, as many history books are.
If you are interested in the history of history it might be worth perusing, or maybe if you want to write a story set in the period and would like to better grasp the ideas and prejudices of the day.
Even if you are not so inclined the you should read the intro/preface, written by a contemporary of Newton to the Queen by John Conduitt (Politician and relative of Newton) - It is as fine and wonderful example of Obsequious Narcissism as I have ever read. It is a must-read!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Con...
If you are interested in the history of history it might be worth perusing, or maybe if you want to write a story set in the period and would like to better grasp the ideas and prejudices of the day.
Even if you are not so inclined the you should read the intro/preface, written by a contemporary of Newton to the Queen by John Conduitt (Politician and relative of Newton) - It is as fine and wonderful example of Obsequious Narcissism as I have ever read. It is a must-read!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Con...
Read
March 29, 2013hi
its good
its good
May 3, 2021
Incredibly tedious.
September 18, 2021
A must read for any history readers, accurate, real, unbiased trusted author.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews