MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Edwin Johnson (History)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Isn't the point that Common Era Chronology had in fact to first replace all alternate chronologies, eg Ab urbe condita, Islamic etc which then allows only safe challenges to the timeline within the linear paradigm?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I don't really get this fascination with straight line scriptocentric history (which is the current dominant paradigm for decoding the past)

I think it is more to do with our current understanding of how time works in this, our very own, universe. It goes forward for everyone and at the same speed. Human beings are conscious of this and either a) remember what's just happened or b) listen to older people remembering what happened or c) listen to people who have some kind of remit to remember what people said to people that said to people etc or d) record it in some permanent form as best they are able. One can be fascinated by this or not, as one chooses.

you were always going to get multiple so called alternate linear versions, that challenge the start, the middle or the end.

Well, yes, different groups will have their own versions -- though all versions will be linear, won't they, with a start (admittedly legendarily vague by definition), a middle ('history') and an end (the present day) -- but I don't see why they would 'challenge' each other. I would have thought 'separate but equal' describes it better. Even if that is a slogan favoured meretriciously by racists when 'challenging' a different group.

This is how the paradigm renews itself.

You've lost me with this one. The paradigm is the overall assumption that life unfolds as I have described it and can be recorded as I have described it. 'Renewing' it would by definition be overthrowing the paradigm. Unless you mean throwing out the old history and inserting a new one, but I know of no examples of this (apart from a bit of politicking). Do you?

Isn't the point that Common Era Chronology had in fact to first replace all alternate chronologies, eg Ab urbe condita, Islamic etc which then allows only safe challenges to the timeline

But it didn't did it? It just adopted the existing history and stuck in a new base year. Unless you are saying it didn't. We're all ears. I've just written a book saying that is exactly what it did but you can get back to me on that when you have read the book. If you read it. I normally have to pay the minimum wage to get people to read my books but funds are limited so I'd be much obliged if you paid your own way on this occasion.

within the linear paradigm?

You've lost me again. What is a non-linear paradigm? You often speak of cycles but I don't think anyone takes these as being anything more than cosmicly religious. But, again, if you think, say, Hindus actually believe this is accurate history you should say so. And bring along an actual Hindu who says so.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Think of it as target practice to remove your gloom.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I think I did a sketched outline on all this in "The Caucasian Eagle." Wow, I did.
Send private message
N R Scott


In: Middlesbrough
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I don't know if I've directly stolen this from Wiley, or just bastardised and perverted something he's said (sorry if I have), but either way he got me thinking about cyclic time. Now my general view is that linear time only begins ..when a man is turned into a god.

In natural, primitive society man lives in circles. The cycle of night and day, the yearly cycle of the seasons. The cycle of birth and death. In this world time is focused (and measured) on the man himself - his life is the central cycle within endless other cycles.

However, in slightly more complex societies time then becomes measured not in relation to the average man, but the most dominant man in the tribe - This is the Thirteenth Year of the King, etc. Still, this conception of time remains cyclic though, as the king dies and is replaced by a new king, which time now becomes centred upon. When a king is turned into a god though he becomes immortal (undying) ..and his time continues on forever. So now you're born not in 'The Thirteenth Year of the King', in a cycle that will end, but in 'The Two Thousand and Twenty-First Year of King Jesus', in a calendar that won't.

Time is now a long arrow, not a recurring cycle. As we're born into this arrow it's hard for us to imagine what a cyclic concept of time would feel like.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

That is one Wiley theme. Monks tried to arrange circular ripples into straighter lines, around a fake origin. Historians are now trying to complete this.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

N R Scott wrote:
When a king is turned into a god though he becomes immortal (undying) ..and his time continues on forever. So now you're born not in 'The Thirteenth Year of the King', in a cycle that will end, but in 'The Two Thousand and Twenty-First Year of King Jesus', in a calendar that won't.


This is an interesting idea.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

A long, overlong but breathtaking, account of the part Oscar Muscarella played in the last great attempt to expose museum malpractice has just been posted up by our new chum, Stephen Sorensen at ctruth https://ctruth.today/2021/06/22/the-ecosystem-of-forgery/ My own account, in Missing Persons, has the merit of brevity. It concerns the Oxus Treasure which is considered so important it has its own room in the British Museum but is entirely fake. Not looted -- that would make it genuine -- just knocked up in a British India workshop.

In 2003 the archaeologist Oscar Muscarella, employed by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York for 40 years, was reported in The Times as having labelled the Oxus Treasure “mostly fake”.

Has he looked at his contract of employment lately?

However he was attacked by the Director of the Metropolitan, Philippe de Montebello, who said Muscarella, a long-standing critic of museums’ tolerance and even encouragement of the trade in illegal antiquities, only remained there because of the “exigencies of academic tenure”.

“Thanks, Phil, we’ll leave you to deal with him, we can handle things over here in-house.”

In a follow-up article, John Curtis argued there is overwhelming contemporary evidence that the Treasure was discovered on the north bank of the River Oxus between 1877 and 1880, and he also maintains that most if not all of the objects in the Treasure are genuine.

John Curtis was Keeper of the Middle East Department at the British Museum, 1989 - 2011, so he should know his way about.

He is presently Chief Executive Officer of the Iran Heritage Foundation.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It is interesting to judge the differing methods of a professional like Muscarella and me. He is a hands-on aficionado who judges the Oxus Treasure in terms of connoisseurmanship. He may disapprove of curatorial methods but he is an insider and prefers to use terms like 'mostly fake' and to castigate museums for how they came by their exhibits rather than the exhibits themselves.

I wouldn't know an Oxus Treasure from a hole in the ground, I just say it didn't come from a hole in the ground.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

N R Scott wrote:
Now my general view is that linear time only begins ..when a man is turned into a god.


Correct. This is Julius Caesar.

Wiley's view though is slightly different, that linear time starts when you have a god, and an "adopted" son of god. (i.e. lineage).

This is of course Julius Caesar and Caesar Augustus.

God and Jesus are a later invention, based on Caesar and Augustus, which needed to be inserted post facto.

Lying at the bottom of a canyon, looking at the stars. I have just learnt how they did this. Now on to the Coin evidence.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Beg leave to inform you Fram proceeding Antarctic.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Wiley, can you always say either 'Over' or 'Over and out' as it is difficult to know whether we should respond or not. Over.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Not sure what you are saying. Keep responding.

All I am saying is that Scott is getting very close, I need to speed up.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Over. I get it now. Sorry to have been so slow on the uptake. Over and out.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Hats wrote:
because Claudius of Turin seems strangely ahead of his time vis-a-vis church reform and Rabanus Maurus, a German intellectual, "compiled a pedagogical treatise (c. 810; “On the Formation of Clerics”) that constituted an apology for the Christian study of the liberal arts. His De arte grammatica (“On the Grammatical Art”), derived from the great 6th-century Latinist Priscian, Alcuin, and the 8th-century Anglo-Saxon monk, scholar, and historian Bede, contributed to the medieval development of logic."


Intrigued, I dug a little deeper, in the spirit of Edwin Johnson.

wiki wrote:
As bishop of Turin, Claudius found that men were often directed to go on pilgrimage to Rome for penance and that worshippers were accustomed to venerate Christ and the saints by bowing before images and relics. Claudius, coming from an educated background, was not greatly exposed to such provincial modes of worship.[10] He made attacks on the use of images, relics, and crosses, he opposed pilgrimages to obtain absolution, and he had little regard for the authority of the pope due to his belief that all bishops were equal.[3]

Edwin points out that Leland in effect created a national inventory of scripts in the 1530s. So I had a brief look at what might be helpful. When Leland was touring the country on King Henry's behalf, he was looking for manuscripts that might contain a precedent for Henry’s stand against Rome or, even better, proof of England’s right to exist as a sovereign nation independent in ecclesiastical matters. Leland did have some success, for example he uncovered and brought to the royal library a 12th-century copy of a commentary on St Matthew’s gospel by Claudius of Turin, which he had discovered at Llanthony Priory. Claudius anticipated Henrician policy in his attack on relics and his repudiation of pilgrimages. The manuscript was subsequently stored at Westminster Palace and is found in the inventory of the library taken in 1542.

So your suspicions about Claudius are probably correct. He was of his time.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Jump to:  
Page 3 of 5

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group