Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Sheba identified by Velikovsky "Ages in Chaos"

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 15 of 15
  • Message 1.Β 

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Thursday, 17th November 2005

    Please please please tell me Michael Wood has by now read Immanuel Velikovsky's "Ages in Chaos" wherein the identification of The Queen of Sheba as the Queen Hatshepsut of Egypt (and Ethiopia) is almost positively ascertained.
    Brits do know about Velikovsky's revised chronology, do they not?
    links at www.goodoldphil.com
    Also please see pages 35-36 in "Stargazers and Gravediggers"
    which is Velikovsky's memoirs to "Worlds in Collision"

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Saturday, 19th November 2005

    what links?

    all the links there take you to Buddist sites or sites to do with health

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Saturday, 19th November 2005

    also when has Hatshepsut ever been considered to have been a Queen of Ethiopia??

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Sunday, 20th November 2005

    oops, I thought I remembered a Velikovsky link on my website. It will be revised this week. Velikovsky, in "Ages in Chaos" references "Queen of Egypt and Ethiopia" from Josephus and, of course, Velikovsky clarifies the mistakes Manetho made by introducing, in the first century of the present era, a chronological
    error of 600 yeaqrs.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Sunday, 20th November 2005

    Richie, do not search it much, Velikofsky is a writer that I would not personally call a scientist. He is a guy that during the WWII found it interesting to intrigue the world as if there was nothing else more interesting by presenting an unbelievable history approach according to which the time between 1200 BC and 800 BC never existed and that events were all wrongly dated, thus events of the Egyptian and Greek history dated in say 1350 BC should be according to him dated in 950 BC. Hence the Troyan war according to him happened around 850 BC.

    However, since Greeks had maintained good records from 776 BC and onwards (lost today) it is strange that they did not remember well details of such an important war that had happened only a few years before the first ancient Olympic games and they only remembered it through poems that described it as if it had happened 100s of years back (which is most possible, currently the date goes more and more back than the traditional 1200 BC)

    Not to mention that this Velikofsky guy folded badly the whole sequence of Pharaos by doubling different ones, if you want to read and see more detaild on what he proclaimed as 'history' just type "Velikofsky" or however is written his name and read. If you ask me, he is an anxious man trying to prove the Bible right (probably trying to shorten the global history of this universe to fit within a span of 6000 years?).

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Sunday, 20th November 2005

    Hi Nik,

    Yeah I did a google on him and when the results came through I had to laugh quite a bit. He seems to think that the earth came from Saturn and that the planet Mercury is responsible for the tower of Babel and the list just went on and on.

    I thought when I read the first post mention that Hatsheput was the Queen of Ethiopia that someone funny was going on and the google search just backed that up

    Cheers for the warning though

    Rich

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Monday, 21st November 2005

    I love it. Totally misrepresent Velikovsky and then knock down those old straw dogs.
    Let serious readers try this:

    I love Velikovsky's quote "Ridicule is the argument of the mob". And why exactly did Einstein have "Worlds in Collision" open on his desk when he died? That old dummy.

    Also read "Earth in Upheaval THEN mock data.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Monday, 21st November 2005

    Furthermore, bless your hearts:

    Sign me
    Good old Phil
    and ignore the link in my first post until I update.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Monday, 21st November 2005

    So, you say you Googled?

    So did I, and while, again, some misquote Velikovsky then refute him, you will also see this site, among many many others:


    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 21st November 2005

    No its not ridicule. You'll find wit is educated insolence, at least according to Aristotle. What they are doing is highlighting the absurdity of Velivosky's revisionism. As to Einstein, chances are he was having a good chuckle at the combination of biblical hageography, psycho babble and denial of his own work on relativity.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Monday, 21st November 2005

    Yet, of course, so many imponderables that the insolent stumble over. Crack wise and you need study no more. Amazing how that man, Schaeffer, late head of the department of antiquities at the Louvre, confirmed Velikovsky's thesis with broad raging archeological studies throughout the mid east.
    Try this on:

    goodoldphil

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Tuesday, 22nd November 2005

    Ah but evidently you misunderstand that in order to be able to ridicule the theory they must have some prior knowledge of the ideas currently in circulation. Therefore it is not as if they have decided that they don't need to study the material, more that they have seen there are more productive explanations. Does Velevosky appeal to you because it vouches that the scripture tells it like it is whereas the evidence from other sites in the Near East were merely corruptions of this message or is it simply a tirade against a conspiratorial elite with their supposed closed minds?

    In any case the article commenting on the problems of uniting prehistoric chronologies written almost fifty years ago only highlights issues that had been around since the 1880s. What is missing is any use of scientific dating methods like Carbon 14 that have largely enabled archaeologists to move beyond obsessing over when a site was occupied by whom, allowing them to supposedly concentrate on why and how they developed following the example set by Childes, except in post war West Germany where concentration on the details of reporting sites took preference over any explanations given the legacy of the Nazis attitude to the past. By and large scientific methods have tended to confirm a significant gap after the Mycenaean period with no apparent recovery for centuries. Still it is nice to see the rationalisation of Greek origins in the Epiriot region, modern Albania, from the assumptions that the oldest shrine in the Greek world was Dodona.

    As such Velivosky's catastrophism is probably his most lasting legacy to the archaeological world, his spats with the establishment of his day being more a footnote. Certainly Jared Diamonds latest critically acclaimed work on how societies cope with such catastrophes owes something to Velivosky's denial of the constructivist attitude to human development that assumed things were always getting better.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Tuesday, 22nd November 2005

    Lolbeeble, I would not give Velikofsky the pleasure of having accomplished anything even in an indirect way! He! See, catastrophology was performed by a large number of other writers.

    PS: I did not understand the comment on the Dodone place, nobody said that this is the birth point of Greeks and if one did then he could not base it on solid arguments.Easter Epirus and western Macedonia is considered as the 'last point before division' of the Makednoi tribe but nobody ever linked that place to a large number of other Greek tribes. Dodone is only considered as the oldest known Greek oracle dating from Mycenean times, an oracle that managed to survive in classical years fully functional (the temples in Dodone of course were later constructions over older ones accomplished in archaic/classical times).

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by goodoldphilusa (U2519971) on Tuesday, 22nd November 2005

    The babelflapping evoked by my Sheba post persuades me to start anew in the hopes that there may be a true scholar or two in the english speaking world. As the professor at the University of Michigan screamed "I have not read Velikovsky and I never will. It is all LIES, LIES!!".
    Well, what more need I say? The "Sheba" respondants either did not truly read any of Velikovsky's works, or they forgot what they read. And, no, I am not trying to prove anything about the bible. I was raised Catholic and I am now a happy practicing buddhist within the SGI-USA. And I am the founder and executive director of "The American Philalethists"...lovers of truth. Opining is tantamount to whining. Get on with study, then write, please.

    I am going to give you another chance.

    Respectfully,
    goodoldPhil

    Here: www.varchive.org/bon...

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Wednesday, 23rd November 2005

    Dunno Nick, I may be on shaky ground but then thats nothing new. As I undersatnd the matter it is Herodotus who rationalised the story of Dodona's importance to the Greeks and as you have noted elsewhere there was some debate as to when the Greek language entered the penisular primarily because Linear B remained untranslated and not universally recognised as Greek. In the absence of anything more concrete than the linguistic identification of Greek as psrt of the Indo European familiy of languages and the idea of Dodona's antiquity lead to suggestions that this was the common origin of the Greek language as it was the oldest example of their culture. Certainly there are sources that went so far as to suggesting the Epirus region had a greater proportion of place names with archaic Greek etymologies. It is in this light that relationships between tholos graves of Mycenae and Albanian mounds was of interest.

    Report message15

Back to top

About this Board

The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

or Β to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The message board is closed for posting.

This messageboard is .

Find out more about this board's

Search this Board

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.