Warning: array_merge(): Argument #2 is not an array in /home/perfecto/perfectworldtoo.us/public_html/preflight/indexFunctions.php on line 3674
Ancient History
Folders: A Sense of Place ·­ Blogosphere ·­ Chat ·­ Competitive Sports ·­ Current Events ·­ Domestic Sphere ·­ Family ·­ Finance, Careers, & Education ·­ Games & Goofiness ·­ Geek Subjects ·­ Global Policy ·­ Health & Fitness ·­ Literature & The Arts ·­ Marketplace ·­ Meta-Forum ·­ Mostly Christmas ·­ Movies ·­ Politics ·­ Social Policy ·­ TPW Archives ·­ TV Talk ·­ Values & Beliefs
The Perfect World >> Geek Subjects >> Ancient History

Ancient History

Roy Kay -- Monday, May 17, 2004 -- 11:23:46 PM

I don't know how many people are interested in this. By "Ancient", I mean BEFORE (or only edging up to) the history of the Classical Period of Greece, Rome, Parthia, Guptas and Han.

This is for comment, speculation, "what ifs" - whatever you find engaging.

This thread is tagged: history
tag this thread:   
  (All users will see what tags exist for a thread. Please tag carefully!)
Check Subscriptions   The Latest   First   Previous   Next   Recent   
Nicholas Kronos -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 08:14:27 PM -- 441 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

Judah," whom they indicate may have been their son, could have been the "lad" described in the Gospel of John as sleeping in Jesus' lap at the Last Supper.

Oh please. From the Gospel of John:

Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.

Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him, that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake.

He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

This was Jesus's child? I've always heard this person identified as John himself.

Frank Black -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 08:19:47 PM -- 442 of 740

That was a new one on me, too.

debby -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:09:21 PM -- 443 of 740
lighten up

How would DNA identify it as Jesus? What are they comparing it to?

Frank Black -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:12:28 PM -- 444 of 740

I think they are just saying that the two adults are not of the same family, ergo man and wife.

Nicholas Kronos -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:36:20 PM -- 445 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

The problem with that as proof of anything is Matthew and Jesus weren't related, either, which shoots down "tombs normally contain either blood relations or spouses."

It's obvious that they are coming at this looking only for facts that fit with their preconceived notions. Even if she had to be married to someone, why not Matthew or one of the other men?

Nicholas Kronos -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:45:30 PM -- 446 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

I mean, although I don't know all the other archaelogical and scientific techniques that go into this, I do know the text (Bible). And if saying John refers to a "lad sleeping on Jesus's lap" is typical of their loosey-goosey approach, then I question their work.

1. The person in the verse is awake because Peter asks him a question.

2. Peter does this rather than ask Jesus directly. Would he have said to Jesus's youthful--so small as to sleep on his father's lap--son "Ask your pop who's the fink?" Why would he not act Jesus directly rather than presumably waking the kid?

3. Jacobovici cannot be referring to another source because he states it's the Last Supper and the Gospel of John.

Frank Black -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:48:15 PM -- 447 of 740

I just think it's kind of weird. "Oh, isn't that handy, it's got everyone there that we need for our nice little conspiracy theory."

Amaxen -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 09:49:15 PM -- 448 of 740
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is.

Does seem a little fishy to me.

I guess we'll see.

Nicholas Kronos -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 10:03:03 PM -- 449 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

Yes, even if we have to manipulate their names a bit. The Miriam-Maria-Mary explanation is garbled (I think the reporter is likely responsible for that), and:

Only one of the inscriptions is written in Greek. It reads, "Mariamene e Mara," which can be translated as, "Mary known as the master."
Francois Bovon, professor of the history of religion at Harvard University, told Discovery News, "Mariamene, or Mariamne, probably was the actual name given to Mary Magdalene."
Bovon explained that he and a colleague discovered a fourteenth century copy in Greek of a fourth century text that contains the most complete version of the "Acts of Philip" ever found. Although not included in the Bible, the "Acts of Philip" mentions the apostles and Mariamne, sister of the apostle Philip.
"When Philip is weak, she is strong," Bovon said. "She likely was a great teacher who even inspired her own sect of followers, called Mariamnists, who existed from around the 2nd to the 3rd century."

Bovon's explanation is as clear as mud.

I wonder whether they've compared the DNA of the two "parents" to the "child." If so, why does the story not describe the results? If they haven't, why not?

Nicholas Kronos -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 10:08:07 PM -- 450 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

Oh and this:

Robert Genna, director of the Suffolk County Crime Laboratory in New York, analyzed both the patina taken from the Talpiot Tomb and chemical residue obtained from the "James" ossuary, which was also found around 1980, but subsequently disappeared and resurfaced in the antiquities market. Although controversy surrounds this burial box, Genna found that the two patinas matched.
"The samples were consistent with each other," Genna told Discovery News.
Upon examining the tomb, the filmmakers determined a space exists that would have fit the "James" ossuary. Given the patina match and this observation, Jacobovici theorizes the lost burial box could, in fact, be the "James" ossuary.

Yes, "controversy surrounds" the James box, but last I heard it was determined to be a fake. Odd that the Discovery piece fails to mention that, but instead uses the James ossuary as evidence to support the contention this is all real.

Frank Black -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 10:11:42 PM -- 451 of 740

My hypothesis: They found a tomb with a bunch of uninscribed boxes and someone scratched in all of the right names.

Frank Black -- Monday, February 26, 2007 -- 11:44:41 PM -- 452 of 740

I posted some more links.

Nicholas Kronos -- Wednesday, February 28, 2007 -- 04:07:45 PM -- 453 of 740
"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?"--President Trump (tweeting)

I read the transcript of their appearance on Larry King, and they were really working the statistical angle, how the odds of those names all appearing together were so unlikely. Unfortunately since the two guys debating them were theologians they didn't have much to rebut that, but the obvious problem they didn't address is some names had to occur in a tomb with 10 people buried there: the movie makers are assigning meaning to these names. It's similar to the poker hand fallacy: a royal flush is highly improbable, but so is every other specific set of cards you draw. Yet you have to draw something.

In this instance we have a tomb that actually contains 10 ossuaries. They have chosen to focus on five (or six, if you count the "son") as meaningful. One name is Jesus (I presume it's really Joshua), which in the Larry King interview is said to have been given to about one in 11 males at the time, so in a tomb of 10 people, it would not be that rare. Now look at the other names: Mary (twice), Matthew, Joseph, and Judah. However, there is no reason for Matthew to mean anything because the Matthew of the Bible has no reason for being buried with Jesus; they've included it only to make the improbability more favorable to them. Judah, also, is nonbiblical since Jesus doesn't have a son in the Bible, much less one named that. So the "son" could have any name and thus doesn't affect the probability either.

The second Mary is also referred to by a non-biblical name, and the researchers offer an incoherent explanation as to why (See post 449.)

Jesus is said on his inscription to be the son of Joseph, so that makes the presence of Joseph in the tomb redundant as far as probability: that this Jesus had a father named Joseph is more significant than that he is buried with some unknown Joseph, so that the former fact subsumes the latter. All you need to calculate the probability is what are the odds that someone named Jesus in this period and place would be the son of someone named Joseph, then multiply that probability by the likelihood that such a person if buried in a tomb with nine other people would be buried with a woman named Mary. Or two Marys, if you prefer, although I think one has to assume that Jesus had a relationship with Mary Magdalene to make the second Mary meaningful and one also must accept the reasoning about why this Mary's "surname" is different than that Mary's.

My guess is such a probability would still be low, but not the millions to one they would like to claim. I also think the names are probably faked...yet it's worth pointing out that if these people were actually trying to be scientific rather than leaping to their preferred conclusions, they'd be more honest about the ascertainable facts.

Their DNA evidence claims are even worse. It's like they just want to shout the phrase "DNA evidence" without saying anything about what the DNA evidence actually shows.

This exchange, I think, was telling as far as their "selectivity":

MOHLER: And frankly, I'm a bit surprised by Dr. Tabor's, at least, qualified endorsement of this, given the fact that this appears to me to be at least very inconsistent what he's arguing in his own book about Jesus not being the son of Joseph, which, by the way, we Christians don't hold either. But he's never known as the son of Joseph in terms of early Christian witness, he is never mentioned that way.
TABOR: No, he is. He's actually known as the son of Joseph in the New Testament, that certainly was his legal title.
MOHLER: It is not a name by which he was known in early Christian references at all. And you, if I'm not mistaken, Dr. Tabor...
TABOR: Well, he is called Jesus, son of Joseph, five times in the New Testament. So I don't know...
MOHLER: You argue that he's not the son of Joseph in your book, you also argue that if there is a tomb, it was likely to be in Galilee. So, I mean, you talk about...
TABOR: Well, that would be another show. But let's stay with this...

From Publishers Weekly re Tabor's book: "Tabor concludes that the most historically plausible claim is that Jesus' father was neither God nor Joseph, but another man, possibly a Roman soldier named Pantera."

So, if the Joseph in the tomb doesn't have the same DNA as the Jesus in the tomb, Tabor has a ready explanation for that, too. Either way, it's good!

Patrick -- Wednesday, February 28, 2007 -- 04:11:42 PM -- 454 of 740
balsamic jihad

Frank Black -- Wednesday, February 28, 2007 -- 11:26:51 PM -- 455 of 740

Someone posted a link to their critique of it at ArchaeoBlog, btw.

debby -- Friday, March 02, 2007 -- 04:42:53 PM -- 456 of 740
lighten up

OK getting just a smidge desperate here, I'm looking for a general overview of Hawaiian chants, how they were used and passed down, what they covered as far as information, I know they were used to trace royal genealogy, spell out taboos and religious rules, and even found an obscure artlicle about their use for astronomy, but I just need some kind of general article that I can cite in a paper. I have access to all kinds of awesome libraries but am flailing around on the search.

cross posted in librarians.

Frank Black -- Wednesday, March 07, 2007 -- 07:29:17 PM -- 457 of 740

A post I did in November 2005 on something called the Oak Island Treasure hath generated some controversy.

TAFKA -- Thursday, March 08, 2007 -- 01:07:14 AM -- 458 of 740
That moment when you have so much shit to do that you decide not to do any of it

There was a big ol' article about that in Rolling Stone. People have gone mad and spent all their money and died, trying to find that treasure. It's weird.

Frank Black -- Tuesday, March 13, 2007 -- 11:05:08 PM -- 459 of 740

Cavemen liked Kylie Minogue's butt .

Pincher Martin -- Tuesday, March 13, 2007 -- 11:22:55 PM -- 460 of 740
"The worst enemy of human hope is not brute facts, but men of brains who will not face them." - Max Eastman

I can't speak for cavemen, but I think Ms Minogue's butt is more along the lines of something we modern males fully appreciate.

Check Subscriptions   The Latest   First   Previous   Next   Recent   
The Perfect World >> Geek Subjects >> Ancient History