Re: New Tomb Discovered In Greece

[bob]

I guess I should just leave now, but after re-reading my post you replied to, I asked you to give me documented proof of whether or not Alexander I (as oppossed to Alexander III) was originally declined entrance into the Olympics. I also asked how Peter Green could make such an argument that Alexander I (and subsequently Herodotus) would "fabricate" Macedonian identity. I asked for proof, and what I got in response was nothing footnoted, and no historical information, just bable. When people post stuff that is not footnoted, it is just thier opinion without any proof. I guess what I was expecting was someone to quote the Herodotus quote, or to mention the context of Herodotus, and give me proof as to whether or not Green is right or wrong with some intelligence as to why. No one is blasting Peter Green on this forum, but apparently everyone has ripped the first chapter of his book out for they flat our reject his conclusions. I cannot imagine Green being on an agenda to prove anything in the modern political world, and when I read pages 1-9 in his book where he claims the Macedonians were not greek, he doesn't get political at all, nor refer to any modern situation. Since this will be my last post, and I can let everyone else have the last words, and insult me without reply, I figured before I left I would ask Why Green is everyone's favorite book if no one agrees with him? Is Peter Green the same low life as me on an agenda? If not, what is the difference between me and him? If I get blasted for using "isolated quotes" well, what can I do? All quotes are removed from context on any forum, but people must remember the context when discussing them. If they don't they should be brought to account. So no one else returns any quotes to me because they would be "isolated"? How can you have any study on ancient sources without being able to quote them? All quotes are "isolated." sorry guys, while typically I learn from others with a variety of views, I can't learn here where arguments take place without footnoting. Have nice lives...

[kennyxx]

Olympic Games.Bob hail. I would urge not to get upset with any Posts nor assume your been ganged up on. I would say your readings and eye for detail are much more than I. I have read scores of books and still cant remember long Greek or ancient names. And dates.As you say your new to Alexander studies. I would urge you read your chosen books. About Alexander ancient Greek Rome even. Its all relative and indeed you will arrive at your own personal Alexander and how you view the guy.I have a tremendous problem with Quotes sayings and even what Alexander was thinking. I would say none of them can be proved. All we can be sure about is the Histories and the cross referenced events battles etc. What we cant put into doubt are his achievements.With the rest we can only discuss debate even and try some logic with some things. we all draw our own conclusions.The only References to the Olympic games I read were that Philips horses or a chariot won a race at the time of Alexanders birth. And with Alexander all I read was his total distain for the olympics and prfesional athletes and aparently he would only compete against kings wich runs to form. I see no reason why even if the Macedonians were classed as none Greeks why they would be barred. Philip must have had some participants in the games for the accasion above mentioned.Keep in there Bob you will get to where you want. Kenny

[Paralus]

Strike me bloody sideways! Even this thread. It wasn't even artful Bob, more like wrenching the steering wheel and switching direction.I used the term "single-minded" on another thread with which you argued. The immediate sidetracking of this thread would be GÇô in the words of Joe Jackson GÇô "And so there goes your proof".I'd prefer to find out whose tomb it is rather than in what language the bloody inscriptions are.Paralus.

[Efstathios]

Jim,i wouldnt talk about agendas that easily.You cannot accuse someone of following agendas just because he doesnt agree with you or because he seeks answers to some questions.Bob has layed out some quotes for us to reply and help him understand what's happening.For us greeks some things are pretty obvious but for other people they are not. Bob,you have to understand that the ancient greeks loved to fight eachother.And loved to accuse eachother.In the persian wars of 480 bc the athenians and spartans and beotians and all the southern greeks were accusing Macedonia for not doing anything to stop the Persian invasion from the north,and they accused Thebes for the same thing,for allying with the enemy.If they thought that the macedonians were not hellenes or Macedonia was not part of the greek territory they wouldnt accuse them.As they didnt accuse the others (p.e the egyptians).They expected from macedonians to guard the hellenic frontiers because they were hellenes. Many people see the tree but fail to see the forest.Just because there are quotes that seem to seperate greece from macedonia,that doesnt mean anything.We have to undestand how these people thought.We have to see what lies beyond the quote.What is the backround. I cannot say much about Green as i havent read his entire book,but i have read Cartledge's.And let me assure you that many of his sayings are just his own oppinion.In some parts he states that,in some other he doesnt.But the point is that when for example he says that Arrian made up the bigger part of a speech of Alexander he doesnt have any proof for that.It's only his assumption.The fact and historical truth is that Arrian quoted the speech from Ptolemy and Aristovoulos (Arrian tells us that),and Cartledge mentions it.But then he says that Arrian must have made up the bigger part of it.And that's his oppinion based on no historical facts.Same thing applies to Green too.It's only their oppinion and speculation.

[Efstathios]

Another thing Bob.Faith is something that we cannot bring facts and proof for.That's why its called faith.I dont know what you have found out and made you follow another path but beware because oppinions and researches about religions change all the time. Recently i took part in a controversy about the archaiology of the Bible.I wouldnt have taken part in it but i saw some absolute oppinions that made me research the matter a little bit.There is an archaiologist mr.Finkelstein who along with his team has done researches and excavations in Israel and states that he hasnt found any facts to prove that what the bible states about persons or locations is true.He says that he has found that Solomon and David were not such powerfull kings as they were believed to be,that some cities were much smaller in size,some chronologies were wrong,and other things. And some people take Finkelstein's oppinions (because that's what they are,oppinions,and not facts) as the truth.And while trying to prove to these people that they must not be absolute about these things i stumbled across some webpages that present the other side of view.They present the work of other archaiologists that contraddicts mr Finkelsteins work.And especially there was this page about Megiddo,and the debate between Finkelstein and a harvard archaiologist (Stager i think) along with his own team that have serious facts that things are not as Finkelstein suggests they are.Theit point of debate is whether the gate of Megiddo and a portion of the city was built by Solomon at around 1000 bc or by someone else 100 years after.If Solomon built it as Stager suggests then this proves that the bible may have been correct about Solomon,something that Finkelstein does not believe.And the facts and archaiological proof suggest that stagger may be correct,but the debate is still going on as the dig continues. cont...

[Efstathios]

The point is that we must not be absolute about things like that which have to do with archaiology and history because new things occur all the time.Archaiology has many obstacles.We cannot dig up an entire country and we cannot possibly find everything.Plus the fact that many of the things that archaiologists are looking for may have been looted over the years and now be at any place.And in Israel that is a fact.Jerusalem and the whole area was looted many times thousand of years ago.By the romans,the Arabs,the Crusaders,the Knights templars e.t.c.So many things will not be found by an archaiological dig. And when it comes to Faith and religion,well it's faith.It wrong to deny your faith because some archaiologist has formed an oppinion that it may change in 10 years again and again.Faith goes beyond history and archaiology.

[Nicator]

Hi ya Paralus,
I knew you couldn't resist the temptation, so I guess its all par for the course. Allow me to retort. One little tidbit that comes to mind is Green's fantasy about Hephaestion being chummy with Demosthenes. First, he creates the relationship, then he nearly develops it into a complete storyline. Though true, his transgressions are usually not rendered as pure fact, they are numerous enough and developed with such irreverence to the sources that some would be inclined to swallow them wholeheartedly. What makes him so readable, besides his cutting turn of phrase, is his willingness to offer up such quips...regardless of the consequences. Some of (perhaps most of)these quips may just be true. What great insight!In the immortal words of the cartoon femme fatale in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" I'm not really bad I'm just drawn that way. later Nicator

[Paralus]

You cheeky bugger Nicator!I can't recall the Hephaestion/Demosthenes thing. It has been some time since I read Green's Alexander though - must have another gander. I've been more into the Hellenistic side of things and Philip in recent years. I find the successor kingdoms and the Diadochoi the more interesting era.So much like our current times.Paralus.

[ruthaki]

Most of this doesn't seem to be anything about the new-found tomb. I think this is an exciting find and can hardly wait til the decipher who it might have belonged to. I'm fantasizing Antipater's family.

[Paralus]

Now, that's not a bad guess.Yes, I am more interested in whose it was - or which family's.Paralus

[bob]

Okay, but Finklestein and Silberman did not bring about more "facts." We can document all the Pharoahs back to 3150 BCE. We can document over 30 dynasties. But the FACT is the Bible gives the EXACT date of the Exodus, see 1 Kings 6:1. Thus, since SOlomon's reign started c. 960 BCE, the Exodus then happened during the reign of Thutmose IV. The ONLY egyptian mention of Israel that has EVER been found archaeologically is the Merneptah Stele, dated to 1210 BCE, and mentions Israel as a minor player living in Canaan. There is no Egyptian mention of Asnat Paneach, Joseph, Moses, plauges (10 plagues, including the death of the first born in which "there was not a house in Egypt in which there was not a cry...") Plus, one cannot argue even this simple fact: The Philistines did not exist and were not in Israel until long after Abraham. The "Sea Peoples" came into Canaan circa 1150 BCE, and we have overwhelming Egyptian evidence they came to Egypt first, losing all the battles, see wall egyptian reliefs, and then settled north of Egypt circa 1150 BCE. How is it then, if the Exodus happened in 1440 BCE, and the Hebrews were slaves 430 years, and Jacob, Isaac, and Avraham are before the 430 years of slavery (circa 2000 BCE) how is it that Abraham encounters Philistines (Gen 20:1)? Isaac encounters them (Gen 26:1). THese are anachronisms. It is like saying that Columbus ran into the French in America in 1492. Impossible. THe number of anachronisms are amazing. The only archaeological evidence we have proving David existed is the Tel Dan inscription. That is it, no other mention of David from the sands...

[bob]

Take Exodus 1:11. It says that the Israelites as slaves built the cities Pithom and Ramses. If the Exodus happened during the Reign of Thutmose IV (1440 BCE) 480 years before Solomon, how is it they built those two cities? Do you realize that we have proven archaeologically that Ramses the Great ordered the building of the Cities Pithom and Ramses? Ramses the Great did not rule until 1290 BCE. THus, he ruled 150 years AFTER the Exodus, thus, it is impossible to say that the Bible's claim that Israelite slaves built those cities to be accurate. I would suggest for a layperson to biblical archaeology you read Dever's books, he is the former head of the Israeli Antiquities, was the guy interviewed on most Mysteries of the Bible shows on A&E, is now the head of the Near Eastern Studies at University of Arizona, and he supervised and lead over 30 digs of different archaeological sites in Israel. He has done a lot more digs than Finkelstein and Silverman. I agree with Finkelstein and Silvermans views in general, but they do not use quotes of the Bible comparing it to archaeological evidence as I have in these two posts to make pew sitters in churches and synagogues understand. One other problem you have with the Exodus is that the Phrase "Pharoah" is used in the Torah (Genesis-Deuteronomy). But as soon as you get to Joshua through Kings it is Pharoah Neco, or Pharoah Shishak, etc. SInce the Torah (Genesis and Exodus) never name the pharoah, this is another sign of mythical fabricating. We can verify which Pharaoh fought Josiah, and thus, we can verify 1 Kings 39. But verifying Pharaohs intentionally left vague by later writers making anachronisms is more difficult to elaborate on.
Bob

[bob]

Archaeology does have obstacles, but it proves a lot. Lets say I find a pottery shard in the Tel of ancient Megiddo. What can I verify? First, I send the pottery to the lab, and have a chemist verify. The chemist takes a piece of pottery, and analzyes it. They prove what the compound of the clay is, and give me the LOCATION of ground where the clay to make the pot was taken. They tell me due to the make up of it, the temperature in which the Kiln was that baked the potery. In addition, the potery was found in a layer. Thus, ancient cities were built on high ground (for defence) and where there was water, near roads for travel, etc. That is why when cities like Thebes got leveled, they got rebuilt over the ruins. THus, you use the potery shards, in addition with the coins found to date each layer in a Tel. Thus, you can very accurately date things. Carbon dating is useless, and inaccurate in general. But pottery and coins, and even the languages on potery and coins, do not lie. This is why I care about what the language of the tomb was. SOmeone stated that it was more important to define who's tomb it was. That is correct. If it is not a king, but a common macedonians tomb, it can give us clues as to possibly what a common macedonain burial customes (and lifestyle) was like. If we see the relief in Philips tomb of the hunt, we confirm macedonains were hunters, what does this tomb reveal, and whos' tomb was it? I would love to know.

[Nicator]

If we keep this up, I may be forced to acquire his Hellenistic masterpiece. For so long now I have put off the Jamestown project to finish the Alexander project, that I feel I may be not up to the Hellenistic task...as my heart really just isn't in it. I took my son out to see "The New World" on Sunday. It was surprisingly similar to Alexander in its compression of facts and overall badness. Again, Colin Farrel is miserably lame in his ability to inspire. The real histories are so much more colorful and interesting that my son even said "Dad, I think they've intentionally made a really bad movie to ruin your idea", i.e...ruin the market for it. I sort of felt the same way after viewing both films. How else could you take such material that is tailor made for the big screen and louse it up to such an extent. I sort of felt like I wanted to write the book more and less at the same time. Maybe it will never get done. If nothing else, the Hellenistic age would be better to do because it goes in line with what I've already accomplished, and that is vitally important for any continuity of marketing that will be done on my behalf (either personally or professionally). I'm going out with a buddy to bother the valentines day rejects tonight downtown Chicago. It should be a good time...at least for me:)later Nicator

[Paralus]

G'day Nicator.Survive bothering the Valentine's Day rejects? I assume that will have involved the pouring of libations? And not GÇô as with Alcibiades, at the departure of the doomed Sicilian expedition GÇô a crater poured on Lake Michigan. More like several (plus?) poured down the throat? Something with which I can identify.So, Terence Malick has come a cropper on "The New World" eh? Must say I didn't really enjoy "Thin Red Line" either GÇô my recuuring memory being Nick Nolte's "This is my F****ng war and you aint gonna F**K it up for me!" routine. Not to mention long, languid scenes of grasshoppers on waving grass etc.

From what you say more conflation of historical events to suit the exigencies of Hollywood and financial backers as with the unfortunate Alexander? To this day that remains the biggest let down with the film. Imagine what present day Hollywood would make of the Greco-Persian Wars? Artemesium and Salamis rolled into one and briefly mentioned whilst the main Spartan/Peloponnesian army arrives soon after the death of the three hundred and burning of Athens to deal the Barbarian a massive defeat. In fact, the final showdown on land and sea would most likely happen at the same time.The Jamestown project? The Alexander project? Pray tell and elucidate man! Most interested to hear what you're doing. Of course if it's not for public discourse as yetGǪAnd yes, you simply must find the time for "Alexander to Actium". As with all such tomes, recent discoveries and work are changing views on some subjects, but this is far from out of date. Some have criticised - as they do. One such criticised Green's view that ruler cults were the cause of the demise of the polis. I'd take issue with that. He argues such was the case before the fourth century, the cults hastened the process. Anyway, go have a sticky at the Amazon site and sup on "Alexander's Funeral Games":
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0520083 ... eader-link
I'll get you (or others visiting the site) to read it yet! Believe I'm on a mission hereGǪ."The books Adso! Save the books Adso!" ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091605/ )Paralus.