maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sat Jun 23, 2018 6:17 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


It's the Gulag of Fun



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: History bits
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 4:52 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 15189
Reputation points: 11492
Started this new thread to cover general history.
Quote:
This 3,500-Year-Old Greek Tomb Upended What We Thought We Knew About the Roots of Western Civilization
The recent discovery of the grave of an ancient soldier is challenging accepted wisdom among archaeologists


By Jo Marchant; Photographs by Myrto Papadopoulos
Smithsonian Magazine | Subscribe
January 2017

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/ ... 180961441/


http://www.griffinwarrior.org/griffinwa ... urial.html
Griffin Warrior


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 7:12 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 29074
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Thanks for posting that.

The article describes a truly amazing find.

Someday, someone should invent a time machine, go back to that place in time in Greece, and figure out exactly who the griffin in the grave was.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 9:08 pm 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 19006
Reputation points: 17927
chijohnaok wrote:

The article describes a truly amazing find.



Then, at the end of the article, the brainwashed moralizing Lefty writer calls modern people opposed to mass immigration "racists", and says that surrendering to mass migration was a normal thing, and they all happily embraced it, back in the fourth century BC. :lol: Which is yet more revisionist bullshit from a social-marxist.

As if ancient mass migration didn't usually involve widespread violence, competition, and cultural replacement. Smithsonian should've found a real writer, not some activist.

Article wrote:
The revelation is compelling for anyone with an interest in how great civilizations are born—and what makes them “great.” And with rising nationalism and xenophobia in parts of Europe and the United States, Davis and others suggest that the grave contains a more urgent lesson. Greek culture, Davis says, “is not something that has been genetically transmitted from generation to generation since the dawn of time.” From the very earliest moments of Western civilization, he says, Mycenaeans “were capable of embracing many different traditions.”

“I think we should all care about that,” says Shelmerdine. “It resonates today, when you have factions that want to throw everybody out [of their countries]. I don’t think the Mycenaeans would have gotten anywhere if they hadn’t been able to reach beyond their shores.”

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:22 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:50 pm
Posts: 29074
Location: West coast of the east coast
Reputation points: 20000
Yeah, I did see that.

I was sitting at Moe’s eating dinner as I read the article.

I meant to do some Googling of the author but did not get around to it.


The Smithsonian should know that there is a time and place for SJW activism, and its official website/magazine is not the place for it.

_________________
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.
- misattributed to Alexis De Tocqueville

No representations made as to the accuracy of info in posted news articles or links


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:30 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 10853
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 13856
I'll wait for the streaming mini-series I guess. . .

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Fri Dec 22, 2017 3:11 am 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 15189
Reputation points: 11492
Quote:
Dysentery in Anglo-Saxon England

Of the diseases mentioned specifically by name in Anglo-Saxon sources, dysentery stands out. Dysentery is mentioned in Bede’s Life of Cuthbert (Ch. 8), where he says that Bishop Eata died of “a disease that the doctors call dysentery”. He is telling us this to distinguish Eata’s later death from Boisil’s death from the plague. This is particularly important because Eata dies in c. 685 in the midst of another wave of plague, or at least what we think was plague. It is a good reminder that people died of other infections also during waves of plague.
(Continued)
https://hefenfelth.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... n-england/
Hope nobody's is at '... Moe’s eating dinner as I read the article'


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 4:09 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 15189
Reputation points: 11492
Quote:
Dec 17, 2015 @ 12:57 PM 14,868
The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
Bones Of Saint Nicholas Reveal What Santa Claus Really Looked Like

Kristina Killgrove , Contributor

--image--

Reconstruction of the face of St. Nicholas by Professor Caroline Wilkinson. (Image courtesy Liverpool John Moores University)

In 1953, church personnel in Bari, Italy, opened up the tomb of St. Nicholas in order to start the process of mitigating water damage to the crypt over nearly a millennium. Once restoration was complete, in 1957, an Italian anatomy professor named Luigi Martino was the first modern researcher -- and only researcher known to date -- to do a complete osteological analysis of the bones of the saint. His anatomical discoveries reveal a different image of what Santa Claus looked like than what is commonly seen in popular culture.
(Continued)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinaki ... 0737ee29a1


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 4:57 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 14558
Reputation points: 1737
abradley wrote:
Quote:
Dec 17, 2015 @ 12:57 PM 14,868
The Little Black Book of Billionaire Secrets
Bones Of Saint Nicholas Reveal What Santa Claus Really Looked Like

Kristina Killgrove , Contributor

--image--

Reconstruction of the face of St. Nicholas by Professor Caroline Wilkinson. (Image courtesy Liverpool John Moores University)

In 1953, church personnel in Bari, Italy, opened up the tomb of St. Nicholas in order to start the process of mitigating water damage to the crypt over nearly a millennium. Once restoration was complete, in 1957, an Italian anatomy professor named Luigi Martino was the first modern researcher -- and only researcher known to date -- to do a complete osteological analysis of the bones of the saint. His anatomical discoveries reveal a different image of what Santa Claus looked like than what is commonly seen in popular culture.
(Continued)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristinaki ... 0737ee29a1

I just wonder how was the beard and bald reconstructed? :shock:

Image

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:03 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 15189
Reputation points: 11492
nero wrote:
I just wonder how was the beard and bald reconstructed? :shock:

Image
The third picture down the page (?), maybe.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: History bits
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 2:46 pm 
Offline
buck private
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:01 am
Posts: 15189
Reputation points: 11492
Quote:
5 Reasons to Trust the Bible About the First Christmas
By Tyler O'Neil December 22, 2017
https://pjmedia.com/faith/5-reasons-to- ... christmas/

Every December 25, a vast majority of Christians — and members of other religions — celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. In the Bible, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke flesh out the Christmas story. In today's skeptical age, an increasing number of Christians doubt the accuracy of the Bible's Christmas story, however.

The Bible says that Jesus was born of a virgin, was visited by shepherds who saw a host of angels, was visited by magi who saw a star to mark His birth, and was laid in a manger. Fewer American Christians believe all four of these aspects of the story, however.

The Christmas story inescapably includes miracles, but there are good reasons to accept the Bible's witness about Jesus' life. Here are five reasons not to reject the Christmas story.

1. There is no evidence disproving it.

Surprisingly little evidence has survived from the ancient world. "We wrongly assume that a lack of corroborating evidence for a claim proves that the claim is bogus," John Dickson, founder of the Centre for Public Christianity and author of the forthcoming book A Doubter's Guide to Jesus, told PJ Media in an interview.

"We forget that most of what actually happens in our lives—the touchdown you scored in your teens, the story of your wedding day, the final words your mother spoke to you on her death bed—will leave no corroborating evidence for historians to play with years later," he explained.

A skeptic might ask why Pontius Pilate never mentions Jesus in any letters. To this, Dickson would respond, "we have no letters at all — zero, zip, zilch — from Pontius Pilate (or even Emperor Tiberius)."

"In the same way, it's true we have no corroborating evidence from the pen of Herod the Great mentioning the birth of Jesus, the visit of the Magi, or the massacre in Bethlehem, because, in fact, we have no records at all from Herod’s court," the author added. "We have to piece together what happened from the 1 percent of material that did survive from the ancient world. And that must include the Gospels themselves."

2. Don't reject historical documents just because of miracles.

Dickson also warned against the common idea that just because a document contains reports of a miracle, it must be unreliable. "Some accounts of Alexander the Great, for example, contain miracle stories. This doesn't undermine the general course of Alexander's life and career," he noted.

The author also referenced an event in the life of the Roman Emperor Vespasian. He was said to have performed a healing — and it could have been an orchestrated PR stunt. Accepting the historical documents on this would involve "accepting that some such event took place, even if we remain agnostic about whether the event was 'miraculous.'"

"In the same way, we have two sources, written independently of each other and in the first century, which affirm that Jesus of Nazareth was born without the sexual union of his human parents Mary and Joseph. What do we do with this?" Dickson asked.

He suggested that "this story must have been well-known enough from the earliest stages to make its way into independent sources. Given that members of Jesus’ immediate family were still alive and prominent in the Christian movement well into the 60s A.D., this story of Jesus’ conception must have been promulgated by the family itself. Does this prove the ‘virgin birth’? Of course not. History cannot prove miraculous events."

John Stewart, executive director of Ratio Christi International, also warned against dismissing miracles out of hand. "Before rejecting the details of the Christmas story, it would be wise to evaluate our assumptions, and see if our beliefs are based on evidence or on an unfounded bias in favor of philosophical naturalism (the belief that there is no God, no supernatural, no miracles)," he told PJ Media.

3. The Gospels are reliable.

Stewart also argued that the Gospels are reliable accounts. "In the past 30 years scholars concluded that the Gospels are written in the style of ancient Graeco-Roman biographies ('bioi'), in the same style as Roman historian Suetonius’ The Twelve Caesars," he told PJ Media. "Since bioi have a strong relationship with history, this finding was the death knell for the liberal notion that the Gospels were religious fiction, divorced from history."

He quoted the Gospel of Luke's prologue: “it seemed fitting for me … having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order … so that you might know the exact truth” (Luke 1:3-4).

"Luke’s Gospel claims to be investigative journalism with accounts derived from eyewitnesses and placed in an historical context. This is hardly 'once upon a time' or 'a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away,'" Stewart quipped.

He also noted that "there is compelling evidence that the Gospels were written while eyewitnesses were still alive, possibly prior to A.D. 70 (since there is no mention of the fall of Jerusalem), by eyewitnesses (Matthew and John) and those who relayed the accounts of eyewitnesses (Mark and Luke)."

Another mark in favor of the Gospels is the inclusion of embarrassing details about the disciples — the story of Peter denying Jesus, the disciples being too afraid to stand at the crucifixion, and Thomas' unwillingness to believe Jesus had risen from the dead, for example. If these were fictional accounts, rather than history, why make the founders of a religion look bad?

4. The Quirinius contradiction.

Skeptics often bring up Luke 2:2 in discussions about the historicity of Christmas. This verse places Jesus' birth at the time of a census taken when "Quirinius was governor of Syria." According to Josephus, Quirinius conducted a census in 6 A.D. Matthew's account makes clear, however, that Jesus was born under Herod the Great, who died between 4 B.C. and 1 A.D.

In remarks to PJ Media, Dickson noted that "this would be a very minor inconsistency." Furthermore, due to the lack of contrasting accounts, there are many ways to explain Luke 2:2.

"Best we can tell (from the sole source on it), the Governor of Syria around 5 B.C. (around the time Jesus was born) was C. Sentius Saturninus, about whom we know almost nothing," the author noted. He suggested that Quirinius could have served as co-governor with Saturninus, since very little is known of Quirinius' career between 12 B.C. and 6 A.D.

Dickson also noted that Luke recorded, "this was the first census when Quirinius was governor."

"In other words, Luke knew there were two or more censuses. We only know of one (6 A.D.) but Luke seems to be distinguishing between a later census (the one we know of) and an earlier one that coincided with Jesus’ birth," he said.

The actual Greek terms in Luke 2:2 also make this verse particularly difficult to understand. There are three different ways to translate the original version: the census was the first of many taken when Quirinius became governor; the census was before Quirinius became governor; or the census was before a later census at the time Quirinius became governor.

In other words, even if the contradiction is real and Quirinius was never governor of Syria at the same time as Herod was king of Israel, Luke could easily be translated in a way that resolves this difference.
(Continued)
}


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group