history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism
© 2001-2004 Catastrophism.com
|Sign-up | Log-in|
Introduction | Publications | More
Search results for: persian in all categories
382 results found.
39 pages of results.
31. Perplexities of Orthodoxy. [Kronos $]
... . I. Wolfe Another 600 Year-Old Heirloom? This year, I worked on an excavation in Israel at Tell Dan (Tell Qadi- the hill of the judge), which is claimed to be the site of the ancient city of Dan. It was a wonderful experience and I had the pleasure of working with a great excavation staff headed by Dr. Biran. As a Velikovskian scholar, it was of great interest to me, therefore, to discover that last year they had found a cartouche of Ramses 11 in a Persian level. I asked the staff how is this possible, and they answered that it was either a six-hundred year-old heirloom or antique, or it was an intrusion. Actually, a cartouche of Ramses II, found in a Persian stratigraphical level, would have to be more along the line of being a seven-hundred year-old heirloom or intrusion according to conventional chronology. However, the revised chronology would place Ramses 11 within sixty years of the Persian conquest, thereby removing the enormous chronological discrepancy. I wonder how much evidence has not been ...
32. June 15, 762 BCE: A Mathematical Analysis of Ancient History [The Velikovskian $]
... few exceptions exist are readily apparent from a close study of the text and need not be discussed. For Persia, Media and Lydia, the Assyro-Babylonian system of counting was generally employed. Ethiopian dates were always computed according to the Judeo-Egyptian system. The fact that this dual method of counting years is built into the synchronology from the outset further strengthens its already tightly woven framework. This treatise was limited in its detail to the span of time between the accession of Egyptian King Amenhotep III, the Magnificent, in 905, and the Persian conquest of Egypt in 504. The mathematical analyses of the auxiliary historical periods before 905 and after 504 adhere to all the major tenets of Dr. Velikovsky. In the former period, all synchronisms can be developed with accuracy and precision as far back as 1626, which I feel is the exact year of the Exodus, the Hyksos Invasion and the Santorini Cataclysm. Separately included, but not discussed or detailed in this treatise, is a synchronized chronology of the histories of Egypt and Israel back to the year 1626. It ...
33. Sardanapallus and Arbaces [Catastrophism & Ancient History Journal $]
... views expressed above (item 2) about two victories of a Mede against the Assyrian empire. Athenaeus, in his Deipnosophists, 4 wrote about the revolution of Arbaces against Sardanapallus too. He says that Sardanapallus was, according to some people, a son of Anacyndaraxes, and according to others, of Amabaxaros. We can remark that the real Assurbanipal was a son of Asarhaddon. I cannot see any identity between that name and the names Athenaeus gives for Sardanapallus' father. We must realize, however, that the names sound Persian and that between Assyrian names and their Persian equivalents there exists mostly a very superficial likeness. Velleius Paterculus 5 has a very interesting synchronization. According to him Arbaces belongs to the period of Lycurgus and the foundation of Carthage by Dido. The foundation of Carthage can be dated in the last decennia of the 9th century B.C. The date of Lycurgus, however, causes more difficulties. 6 The least we can say is that we have here ancient evidence in favor of my theory about the date of Arbaces, as expressed above ...
34. Velikovsky, Solomon, strata [SIS Internet Digest $]
... at such calculations with fresh interest and appreciation. While not specifically agreeing with Rose on his proposed dates, I do think he's moving in the right direction. From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Clark Whelton) Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 090652 -0400 Ev wrote: In fact, portions of Old Babylonian Babylon have been excavated, far beneath the stratum Heinsohn and Whelton would identify with that of Hammurabi. Clark writes: This is an important point. Ev says a stratum "far beneath" the layer Gunnar Heinsohn identifies as Persian period (i.e. the first pre-Hellenistic (or pre-Parthian) stratum) has been excavated. Perhaps Ev would be good enough to provide some more details, especially the positional relationship between the stratum he mentions and Hellenistic times, and which strata separate them. Ev wrote: This alone is enough evidence to allow archaeologists to place Hammurabi in a relative context, one impossible to reconcile with Heinsohn's chronology. When one takes into consideration the additional evidence from Mari and elsewhere (Karana, for example), where Old Babylonian remains clearly ...
35. 'Worlds in Collision' After Heinsohn [SIS C&C Review $]
... the use of Egyptian texts to reconstruct the celestial causes of catastrophic events, of which I shall mention only two. The first is negative: the famous Pyramid Texts, which do not begin till the late Fifth Dynasty, can no longer be used (as Velikovsky and his successors have done), as a body of mythical evidence for the state of the heavens in the 'high antiquity' before the Venus/Exodus event [20. COMPARATIVE CHRONOLOGICAL CHART E= Egyptian G= Greco-Roman H= Hebrew M= Mesopotamian P= Persian (All dates are BC) CONVENTIONAL CHRONOLOGY VELIKOVSKY'S CHRONOLOGY HEINSOHN'S CHRONOLOGY I SATURN AND JUPITER EVENTS 1. Deluge?? Series from 10th c. to 625 2. Saturn in rings, Jupiter dominant? Pre- 2460? 3. E: Pyramid Texts 2460-2200 2460-2200 late 7th/early 6th c. 4. E: First Intermediate Period 2180-2130 2180-2130 7th c. II VENUS EVENTS 1. First Venus approach? 1450? 2. E: Hyksos invade 1700 1450 800 3. E: Second Intermediate Period c. 1800-1600 ...
36. Early History of the Israelite People: Biblical Fundamentalism in History (I) [The Velikovskian $]
... From: The Velikovskian Vol 2 No 1 (1994) Home¦ Issue Contents Early History of the Israelite People: Biblical Fundamentalism in History (I) Gunnar Heinsohn See Note 1. At the 40th Rècontre Assyriologique Internationale in Leiden, Holland, I obtained Dr. Thomas L. Thompson's Early History of the Israelite People, (2) an erudite historical work. I believe the book gets very close to correctly portraying the problems of Israelite history given that historical narratives of biblical Israel were written in the Persian and Hellenistic periods (3) Thus, it is extremely difficult to select the portions of the history which really correspond to the evidence and, therefore, can possibly be matched with the archeological strata in Israel (or "Palestine," in Thompson's terminology). This basic problem is, as one can recognize, aggravated by the lack of a reliable chronology which can be applied to the actual strata in the ground. Only a sound combination of stratigraphy and chronology will provide "an independently derived history," (4) in comparison to ...
37. It's Time to Get Serious About Manetho [SIS C&C Review $]
... functionaries claiming royal privilege, d. Egyptian loyalists (rebels) under foreign occupation. Group a. Dynasty XVIII from Thebes Dynasty XIX from Thebes Dynasty XX from Thebes (Autonomous) Group b. Dynasty XXI from Tanis (Vassal native) Group c. Dynasty XXII from Bubastis Dynasty XXIII from Tanis Dynasty XXIV from Sais Dynasty XXV from Napata Dynasty XXVI from Sais (pt) Dynasty XXVII from Persia (Libyan (? )) (Libyan (? )) (Libyan (? )) (Ethiopian) (Functionaries) (Persian) Group d. Dynasty XXVIII from Sais Dynasty XXIX from Mendes Dynasty XXX from Sebennytus (rebel native) (rebel native) (rebel native) When reviewed in the order displayed above, is it significant that although we arrive at a different conclusion, we find an exact match with the dynastic numerical sequencing system currently in vogue? The difference between Groups 'b' and 'c' is so slight that it is entirely conceivable that there were only three classifications in Manetho's mind but since establishment historians make such an issue of the ...
38. The Two Sargons and Their Successors (Part II) [Aeon Journal $]
... , these two became kings in their own right and, while they might rightly be termed usurpers, they can hardly be alluded to as regents. Besides which, why does Heinsohn pick on Ishbi-Erra and not Naplanum? Nabonidus' rival regent is named by Heinsohn as Ugbaru, (92) who is more popularly known as Gobryas. Gobryas, however, was not a regent. He was merely a Babylonian governor who went over to Cyrus' side. It was he who "led his own troops and a part of the Persian army into Babylon." (93) Ishbi-Erra was not guilty of a similar traitorous act. Actually, Nabonidus' regent was his own son, Bel-shar-uzur (the Belshazzar of the Old Testament). Bel-shar-uzur, however, was not a rival since he was set up in Babylon by his own father to look after the realm while he was away in Arabia. (94) Ibbi-Sin is not known to have set up his son in a similar position. To be fair, there is some truth to Heinsohn's assertion concerning ...
39. Timna and Egyptian Dates [Aeon Journal $]
... ware in these sites appears in so-called Iron Age II strata, which are dated between ca. 1000 and 586 BCE. These dates, of course, are derived from Biblical Fundamentalist chronology of the Monarchies. From a purely stratigraphic point of view, the Iron Age II period lasts well into the Akhaemenid period of the late 6th/early 5th century BCE( For example, in the stratigraphy of Arad, the last Iron Age II-layer, Stratum VI, gets a termination date of 586 whereas the first and only layer designated "Persian", Stratum V, only begins in the later 5th century.) (20) Since no hiatus whatsoever was found between Arad VI and Arad V, the former belongs to late 6th/ early 5th century BCE rather than to the late 7th/early 6th century. The conventional beginning of Iron Age II around 1000 BCE is also Bible-fundamentalistically derived in order to accommodate King Solomon (965 to 926). From a purely stratigraphic point of view, Arad's six strata for Iron Age II (XI-VI), ending in ...
... signs taken as a pair may have been considered the determinative for all female names: see any work dealing with Champollion's decipherment of "Cleopatra" (Gramm., p. 14; Jensen: Schrift, p. 69; Doblhofer: Voices in Stone, p. 69-- esp. the last). Wescott's suggestion that this feminine ending may have been applied to the Pereset as an "ethnic slur" also seems a little glib. Wescott wishes to see this as a means "to deride the long skirts of Persian archers". Although the fighters depicted in the battle scenes and among the captives are clearly seen to be "clad in light tunics, a few strips of mail, and helmets made of scales" (Peoples of the Sea, p. 34), the archers certainly wore longer skirts and there is no shortage of references among early Greek writers to show that Asiatics (Egyptians excluded) were considered effeminate. Nevertheless, my feeling is against this-- there is no indication of this intention in the spelling, and ...
Search took 0.070 seconds
Search powered by Zoom Search Engine