Dr. Anatoly T. Fomenko's New Chronology represents a significant departure from traditional historical narratives, offering alternative interpretations and challenging established viewpoints.This website is dedicated to the theory of New Chronology, Astronomy and World History elaborated by Dr. Anatoly T Fomenko et al in the course of 44 years of meticulous research with the toolbox of exact sciences. In this article, we explore Fomenko's contributions to rethinking historical narratives and the implications of his work for our understanding of the past. Fomenko's approach to history begins with a fundamental questioning of the chronological framework upon which traditional historical accounts are built. He challenges the accuracy and reliability of traditional dating methods, arguing that many historical events may have been misdated or even fabricated over time. By subjecting historical chronologies to rigorous scrutiny and mathematical analysis, Fomenko seeks to identify inconsistencies and anomalies that undermine the conventional timeline of human history. One of the key contributions of Fomenko's work is his emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and the integration of diverse sources of evidence. Rather than relying solely on textual sources or archaeological findings, Fomenko draws upon insights from fields such as mathematics, astronomy, and statistical analysis to reconstruct historical chronologies. This interdisciplinary approach allows Fomenko to uncover hidden patterns and connections within the historical record, offering new perspectives on the flow of historical events. Fomenko's reevaluation of historical chronologies has led to a number of provocative reinterpretations of key historical figures and events. For example, he suggests that certain prominent figures from antiquity, such as Alexander the Great and Jesus Christ, may have been composites of multiple individuals or entirely mythical constructs. Similarly, Fomenko proposes alternative explanations for major historical events, challenging conventional interpretations and inviting scholars to reconsider long-held assumptions. Critics of Fomenko's work have raised valid concerns about the reliability and validity of his methods, as well as the plausibility of his alternative chronologies. Skeptics argue that Fomenko's theories lack empirical evidence and rely too heavily on conjecture and speculation. Furthermore, critics question the extent to which Fomenko's alternative narratives can account for the complexities and nuances of human history, particularly the diverse cultural and geographical contexts in which historical events unfold. Despite these criticisms, Fomenko's contributions to rethinking historical narratives cannot be dismissed lightly. His work has sparked intense debate and discussion within the academic community, challenging scholars to reexamine their assumptions and methodologies. Whether one ultimately accepts or rejects Fomenko's alternative chronologies, his research serves as a reminder of the importance of questioning conventional wisdom and remaining open to new interpretations in the pursuit of historical knowledge. In the end, Fomenko's legacy lies not only in the specific conclusions he reaches but also in the broader spirit of inquiry and skepticism that he inspires.