Immanuel Velikovsky

From Natural Philosophy Wiki
Revision as of 06:20, 2 January 2017 by Maintenance script (talk | contribs) (Imported from text file)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Immanuel Velikovsky
Immanuel Velikovsky
Born (1895-06-10)June 10, 1895
Died (1979-11-17)November 17, 1979
Residence United States
Nationality Russian Jewish USA
Known for Electric Universe

Immanuel Velikovsky (Иммануил Великовский) (Vitebsk, 10 June 1895 (NS) ? 17 November 1979) was a Russian-born American independent scholar, best known as the author of a number of controversial books reinterpreting the events of ancient history, in particular the US bestseller Worlds in Collision, published in 1950.[1] Earlier, he played a role in the founding of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel, and was a respected psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. His books use comparative mythology and ancient literary sources (including the Bible) to argue that Earth has suffered catastrophic close-contacts with other planets (principally Venus and Mars) in ancient times. In positioning Velikovsky among catastrophists including Hans Bellamy, Ignatius Donnelly, and Johann Gottlieb Radlof,[2] the British astronomers Victor Clube and Bill Napier noted ". . . Velikovsky is not so much the first of the new catastrophists . . . ; he is the last in a line of traditional catastrophists going back to mediaeval times and probably earlier."[3] Velikovsky argued that electromagnetic effects play an important role in celestial mechanics. He also proposed a revised chronology for ancient Egypt, Greece, Israel and other cultures of the ancient Near East. The revised chronology aimed at explaining the so-called "dark age" of the eastern Mediterranean (ca. 1100 ? 750 BCE) and reconciling biblical history with mainstream archaeology and Egyptian chronology.

In general, Velikovsky's theories have been vigorously rejected or ignored by the academic community.[4] Nonetheless, his books often sold well and gained an enthusiastic support in lay circles, often fuelled by claims of unfair treatment for Velikovsky by orthodox academia.[5][6][7][8] The controversy surrounding his work and its reception is often referred to as "the Velikovsky affair".[9][10][11] - Wikipedia