Editing Pseudohistory (section)

=== Main categories ===

==== Alternative chronologies ====
An alternative [[chronology]] is a revised sequence of events that deviates from the standard timeline of world history accepted by mainstream scholars. An example of an "alternative chronology" is [[Anatoly Fomenko]]'s [[New Chronology (Fomenko)|New Chronology]], which claims that recorded history actually began around AD 800 and all events that allegedly occurred prior to that point either never really happened at all or are simply inaccurate retellings of events that happened later.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Novikov |first=S. P. |year=2000 |title=Pseudohistory and pseudomathematics: fantasy in our life |journal=Russian Mathematical Surveys |volume=55 |issue=2 |pages=365–368 |bibcode=2000RuMaS..55..365N |doi=10.1070/RM2000v055n02ABEH000287 |s2cid=250892348}}</ref> One of its outgrowths is the [[Tartarian Empire (conspiracy theory)|Tartary]] conspiracy theory. Other, less extreme examples, are the [[phantom time hypothesis]], which asserts that the years AD 614–911 never took place; and the [[New Chronology (Rohl)|New Chronology]] of [[David Rohl]], which claims that the accepted timelines for ancient Egyptian and Israelite history are wrong.<ref>"In his book ''A Test of Time'' (1995), Rohl argues that the conventionally accepted dates for strata such as the Middle and Late Bronze Ages in Palestine are wrong" – in Daniel Jacobs, Shirley Eber, Francesca Silvani, ''Israel and The Palestinian Territories: The Rough Guide'', p. 424 (Rough Guides Ltd., 2nd rev. ed., 1998). {{ISBN|978-1-85828-248-0}}</ref>

==== Historical falsification ====
[[File:Vortigern-Dragons.jpg|thumb|upright=1.15|[[Geoffrey of Monmouth]]'s ''[[Historia Regum Britanniae|History of the Kings of Britain]]'', a scene from which is shown in this fifteenth-century illumination, was a popular work of pseudohistory during the [[Middle Ages]].]]

In the eighth century, a forged document known as [[Donation of Constantine]], which supposedly transferred authority over Rome and the western part of the Roman Empire to the [[Pope]], became widely circulated.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Before Jon Stewart |url=http://archives.cjr.org/feature/before_jon_stewart.php |access-date=February 19, 2017 |newspaper=[[Columbia Journalism Review]] |archive-date=May 7, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507222608/https://archives.cjr.org/feature/before_jon_stewart.php |url-status=dead }}</ref> In the twelfth century, [[Geoffrey of Monmouth]] published the ''[[Historia Regum Britanniae|History of the Kings of Britain]]'', a pseudohistorical work purporting to describe the ancient history and origins of the British people. The book synthesises earlier Celtic mythical traditions to inflate the deeds of the mythical [[King Arthur]]. The contemporary historian [[William of Newburgh]] wrote around 1190 that "it is quite clear that everything this man wrote about Arthur and his successors, or indeed about his predecessors from [[Vortigern]] onwards, was made up, partly by himself and partly by others".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Thorpe |first=Lewis |title=The History of the Kings of Britain |page=17}}</ref>

==== Historical revisionism ====
The [[Shakespeare authorship question]] is a [[fringe theory]] that claims that the works attributed to [[William Shakespeare]] were actually written by someone other than William Shakespeare of [[Stratford-upon-Avon]].<ref>Hope, Warren and Kim Holston. ''The Shakespeare Controversy'' (2009) 2nd ed., 3: "In short, this is a history written in opposition to the current prevailing view".</ref><ref>Potter, Lois. "Marlowe onstage" in ''Constructing Christopher Marlowe'', James Alan Downie and J. T. Parnell, eds. (2000, 2001), paperback ed., 88–101; 100: "The possibility that Shakespeare may not really be Shakespeare, comic in the context of literary history and pseudo-history, is understandable in this world of double-agents . . ."</ref><ref>Aaronovitch, David. "The anti-Stratfordians" in ''Voodoo Histories'' (2010), 226–229: "There is, however, a psychological or anthropological question to be answered about our consumption of pseudo-history and pseudoscience. I have now plowed through enough of these books to be able to state that, as a genre, they are badly written and, in their anxiety to establish their dubious neo-scholarly credentials, incredibly tedious. … Why do we read bad history books that have the added lack of distinction of not being in any way true or useful …"</ref><ref>Kathman, David. [http://shakespeareauthorship.com/harpers.html Shakespeare Authorship Page]: "... Shakespeare scholars regard Oxfordianism as pseudo-scholarship which arbitrarily discards the methods used by real historians. ... In order to support their beliefs, Oxfordians resort to a number of tactics which will be familiar to observers of other forms of pseudo-history and pseudo-science."</ref>

Another example of historical revisionism is the thesis, found in the writings of [[David Barton (author)|David Barton]] and others, asserting that the United States was founded as an exclusively [[Christianity|Christian]] nation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Specter |first=Arlen |author-link=Arlen Specter |date=Spring 1995 |title=Defending the wall: Maintaining church/state separation in America |url=http://connection.ebscohost.com/content/article/1027400469.html |journal=[[Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy]] |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=575–590}}{{dead link|date=November 2020|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Leopold, Jason |author-link=Jason Leopold |date=14 January 2008 |title=House Passes, Considers Evangelical Resolutions |url=http://www.baltimorechronicle.com/2008/011508Leopold.shtml |access-date=30 April 2019 |website=www.baltimorechronicle.com}}</ref><ref name="Pierard">[https://web.archive.org/web/20090317021107/http://www.bostontheological.org/publications/pdf/2004-2005/jan252005.pdf Boston Theological Institute Newsletter Volume XXXIV, No. 17], Richard V. Pierard, January 25, 2005</ref> Mainstream historians instead support the traditional position, which holds that the American founding fathers [[Separation of church and state in the United States|intended for church and state to be kept separate]].<ref name=":1">[[Rob Boston|Boston, Rob]] (2007). [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Dissecting+the+religious+right%27s+favorite+Bible+Curriculum.%28Church+&...-a0170729742 "Dissecting the religious right's favorite Bible Curriculum"], [[Americans United for Separation of Church and State]], American Humanist Association. Retrieved on April 9, 2013</ref><ref name=":2">{{cite web |last=Harvey |first=Paul |date=10 May 2011 |title=Selling the Idea of a Christian Nation: David Barton's Alternate Intellectual Universe |url=http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/4589/selling_the_idea_of_a_christian_nation%3A_david_barton%27s_alternate_intellectual_universe |access-date=April 9, 2013 |work=[[Religion Dispatches]] }}{{Dead link|date=April 2025 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

Confederate revisionists (a.k.a. Civil War revisionists), "[[Lost Cause of the Confederacy|Lost Cause]]" advocates, and [[Neo-Confederate]]s argue that the [[Confederate States of America]]'s prime motivation was the maintenance of [[states' rights]] and limited government, rather than the preservation and expansion of [[Slavery in the United States|slavery]].<ref>{{cite web |author=David Barton |date=December 2008 |title=Confronting Civil War Revisionism: Why the South Went To War |url=http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=92 |access-date=30 December 2013 |work=Wall Builders |archive-date=31 December 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131231075954/http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=92 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Barrett Brown |date=27 December 2010 |title=Neoconfederate civil war revisionism: Those who commemorate the South's fallen heroes are entitled to do so, but not to deny that slavery was the war's prime cause |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/dec/26/american-civil-war-usa |access-date=30 December 2013 |work=TheGuardian.com}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=June 15, 2011 |title=Howard Swint: Confederate revisionism warps U.S. history |url=http://www.charlestondailymail.com/Opinion/Commentary/201106140917 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131231094729/http://www.charlestondailymail.com/Opinion/Commentary/201106140917 |archive-date=31 December 2013 |access-date=30 December 2013 |work=Charleston Daily Mail}}</ref>

Connected to the Lost Cause is the [[Irish slaves myth]], a pseudo-historical narrative which conflates the experiences of [[Irish indentured servants]] and [[Atlantic slave trade|enslaved Africans]] in the [[Americas]]. This myth, which was historically promoted by [[Irish nationalism|Irish nationalists]] such as [[John Mitchel]], has in the modern-day been promoted by [[White supremacy|white supremacists]] in the United States to minimize the mistreatment experienced by [[African Americans]] (such as [[Racism in the United States|racism]] and [[Racial segregation in the United States|segregation]]) and oppose demands for [[Reparations for slavery in the United States|slavery reparations]]. The myth has also been used to obscure and downplay Irish involvement in the [[Atlantic slave trade|transatlantic slave trade]].<ref>{{Cite news |last=Linehan |first=Hugh |title=Sinn Féin not allowing facts derail good 'Irish slaves' yarn |url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-not-allowing-facts-derail-good-irish-slaves-yarn-1.2644397 |access-date=2021-03-30 |newspaper=The Irish Times |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Kennedy |first1=Liam |title=Unhappy the Land: The Most Oppressed People Ever, the Irish? |title-link=Unhappy the Land: The Most Oppressed People Ever, the Irish? |date=2015 |publisher=Irish Academic Press |isbn=978-1785370472 |location=Dublin |page=19 |language=en}}</ref>

==== Historical negationism ====
While closely related to previous categories, [[historical negationism]] or denialism specifically aims to outright deny the existence of confirmed events, often including various massacres, genocides, and [[Nationalism|national histories]].

Some examples include [[Holocaust denial]], [[Armenian genocide|Armenian Genocide denial]],<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bilali |first1=Rezarta |last2=Iqbal |first2=Yeshim |last3=Freel |first3=Samuel |editor=Newman, Leonard S. |chapter=Understanding and Counteracting Genocide Denial |title=Confronting Humanity at its Worst: Social Psychological Perspectives on Genocide |date=9 December 2019 |pages=284–311 |doi=10.1093/oso/9780190685942.003.0011|publisher=Oxford Academic|isbn=978-0-19-068594-2 }}</ref> as well as [[Nakba denial|Nakba Denial]] in the 1984 work ''[[From Time Immemorial]]'' by [[Joan Peters]].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Sa'di |first1=Ahmad H. |url= |title=Nakba: Palestine, 1948, and the Claims of Memory |last2=Abu-Lughod |first2=Lila |date=2007-04-10 |publisher=Columbia University Press |isbn=978-0-231-50970-1 |pages=304 |language=en |quote=The myth advanced by Joan Peters in her pseudo-historical book, From Time Immemorial}}</ref>

==== Psychohistory ====
{{main|Psychohistory}}
Mainstream historians have categorized psychohistory as pseudohistory.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Barzun |first1=Jacques |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CqW82zyUoVAC&q=clio+and+the+doctors |title=Clio and the Doctors: Psycho-History, Quanto-History and History |date=1989 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0226038513 |location=Chicago |page=3 |access-date=30 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Hunt |first=Lynn |title=A Companion to Western Historical Thought |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |year=2002 |isbn=0-631-21714-2 |editor=Kramer Lloyd S. and Maza, Sarah C. |pages=337–357 |chapter=Psychology, Pschoanalysis and Historical Thought – The Misfortunes of Psychohistory |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=E2eKDjo4B_IC&q=psychohistory+is+a+pseudoscience&pg=PA339}}</ref> Psychohistory is an amalgam of psychology, history, and related social sciences and the humanities.<ref>Paul H. Elovitz, Ed., ''Psychohistory for the Twenty-First Century'' (2013) pp. 1–3.</ref> Its stated goal is to examine the "why" of history, especially the difference between stated intention and actual behavior. It also states as its goal the combination of the insights of psychology, especially [[psychoanalysis]], with the research methodology of the [[social sciences]] and humanities to understand the emotional origin of the behavior of individuals, groups and nations, past and present.

==== Pseudoarchaeology ====
[[Pseudoarchaeology]] refers to a false interpretation of records, namely physical ones, often by unqualified or otherwise amateur archeologists. These interpretations are often baseless and seldom align with established consensus. Nazi archaeology is a prominent example of this technique.<ref>{{Cite web |date=1970-01-01 |title=What did the Nazis have to do with archaeology? |url=https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/archaeology/nazi-archaeology.htm |access-date=2024-03-27 |website=HowStuffWorks |language=en-us}}</ref> Frequently, people who engage in pseudoarchaeology have a very strict interpretation of evidence and are unwilling to alter their stance, resulting in interpretations that often appear overly simplistic and fail to capture the complexity and nuance of the complete narrative.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Fagan |first1=Garrett G. |title=Archaeological Fantasies: how pseudoarchaeology misrepresents the past and misleads the public |date=1963 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=0-415-30593-4 |page=27}}</ref>