Interesting article.
And then the author has to drag in some idea about three centuries having just been “inserted” into the calendar around 1000.
It is difficult for me to express how ludicrous this notion is. We have Chinese, Indian, Mayan calendars and historical records from these “missing centuries.” Seems to me there are also real problems with astronomical calculations if this is taken to be a fact.
I guess the author was serious in this claim, but I find it quite difficult to believe he was.
He inserted those ideas - not his own and not because he advocated them, but to accentuate the fact that the current politically driven (PC)historic record leaves open too many questions that do not jibe with evidence at hand.
His book makes his argument in an entertaining and captivating manner. I highly recommend it.