| Man, Myth & Mayhem in Ancient History and the Sciences |
history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism
|
Catastrophism.com
history linguistics mythology palaeontology physics psychology religion Uniformitarianism |
|
| Sign-up | Log-in |
Introduction | Publications | More
|
Search results for: babylonian in all categories
986 results found.
99 pages of results. 51. Sargonids and Achaemenids [Journals] [Velikovskian]
... the first Persian monarch to enforce Zoroastrian monotheism, and as part of that project issued a famous proclamation outlawing what he describes as the "foreign devas". He also carried off from Babylon the golden image of Bel-Marduk – a blasphemous act long recalled in the latter city. In precisely the same way, Sennacherib issued a proclamation outlawing the Babylonian deities, and he too carried off the golden statue of Bel-Marduk, an outrage supposedly repeated two centuries later by Xerxes. Ahura Mazda's symbol par excellence was fire; and, sure enough, fire altars of a very particular design are found portrayed throughout Iran. How strange then that fire altars of exactly the same type were known in ...
52. In Defence of Higher Chronologies [Journals] [SIS Review]
... ended on October 4 (Julian) -331, when the reign of Sebeknefru came to a close and Alexander the Great took over [5 ]. The Old Kingdom presumably started very late in the second millennium and ended in about the 7th century [6 ]. Since there are ample indications that the Middle Kingdom of Egypt and the First Babylonian Dynasty were contemporary, or at least overlapped [7 ], my lowering of the Middle Kingdom led me to endorse an earlier claim by Gunnar Heinsohn that the First Babylonian Dynasty needs to be lowered to Persian times and is, in fact, to be identified with the Persian Empire [8 ]. In this, Hammurabi would be ...
53. The Venus Tablets: A Fresh Approach? [Journals] [Kronos]
... and appearances of Venus that will match the sequence of disappearances and appearances that is reported on the Venus tablets. This use of the Venus tablets as a means of dating the reign of Ammisaduqa is generally seen as the only exact basis for the second millennium chronology of the entire Middle East. For once Ammisaduqa is dated, and the First Babylonian Dynasty with him, the chronology of that entire region of the world is supposedly placed on a firm footing. Even those who favor this approach, however, have often been unable to decide among the long chronology ( -1701 to -1680), the short chronology ( -1581 to-1560), and the two middle chronologies ( - ...
54. On the Foundations of the Assyro-Babylonian Chronology [Journals] [SIS Workshop]
... it is, according to him, only a nice additional bonus for helping to determine chronology, though he admits the more usual view is that this identification is of prime importance in establishing Assyrian chronology. It is true that Claudius Ptolemy assigned 14 regnal years to Nabonassar (Nabu-nasir) but it is not true to say that either of the Babylonian chronicles certainly did so. Jonsson admits this as far as Chronicle B is concerned, and hence the figure 14 is entered in brackets, but this chronicle apparently demands a shorter reign for Nabonassar, as it apparently assigns only 22 years for the three reigns of Nabu-shum-ishkun, Nabu-nasir and Nabu-nadin-zir together; perhaps 10+ 10+ 2 in ...
55. On Mars and Pestilence [Journals] [Aeon]
... information about the various celestial bodies. To date, however, the collection of information has proceeded at a faster pace than has analysis. This is nowhere more apparent than in comparative analyses of ancient traditions surrounding the planets. One wants to know, for example, what to make of the fact that the ancient Mesoamerican skywatchers- like their Babylonian counterparts- represented the planet Venus as a great warrior or as a fire-breathing dragon. (61) Or why the Babylonians together with several other advanced cultures described the planet Saturn as a "Sun." (62) Such puzzles of planetary lore, difficult to understand according to the central tenets of modern astronomy, could be multiplied ...
56. Stiebing, BAR, and the Revised Chronology [Journals] [Kronos]
... synchronisms, and (b ) Palestinian stratigraphy. Stiebing raised the problem of the identity of the Mesopotamian el-Amarna correspondents - Assuruballit, Kadashman-Enlil, and Burnaburiash - who are usually dated to the 14th century B. C., whereas Velikovsky dates the archive to the mid-9th century B. C., when Shalmaneser III of Assyria and apparently different Babylonian monarchs were reigning. Stiebing is justified in pointing to this difficulty, but his discussion contained several serious mis-statements of fact that should be noted: 1. According to Stiebing, Velikovsky identifies Shalmaneser III with both Assuruballit of Assyria and Burnaburiash of Babylonia, which is incorrect, although he does suggest that Shalmaneser used the latter name in Babylonia ...
57. Velikovsky's Sources Volume Three [Books]
... the terrible Sekhmet, the destructive solar force." The closest approach to a Sekhmet-Venus link that I could find in Müller was the following footnote on p.411: "The lion's head in fig 160 shows Astarte confused with the warlike Sekhmet, her neighbour in Memphis". Astarte, of course, was the Phoenician version of the Babylonian Ishtar, and thus (presumably) a warrior goddess with Venus associations. On the other hand, Müller's footnote- which may only refer to a one- off' confusion- simply associates Sekhmet with Astarte on a warlike footing without any reference to the planet Venus. The warlike character of Sekhmet, and the solar nature of that ...
58. Mitcham Replies [Journals] [Catastrophism & Ancient History]
... is to uplift from "The Hittite Raid" a single date from my table, "A Possible Chronological Outline," which was based on an initial assumption that: . . . the raid by Mursilis I dated to the third year of Nebuchadnezzar I, was the same raid that occurred at the end of the Amorite (1st) Babylonian dynasty. A reading of "The Hittite Raid" makes it clear that I reject that proposal and accept that two and not one Hittite raids on Babylon took place. Thus the 1120 B.C . date for the end of the 1st dynasty of Babylon was- and is- totally rejected. I went on to endorse the ...
59. The AAAS Symposium on Velikovsky [Books]
... Huber use this old source as his guide? Because the book rejects evidence that will contradict Huber's assumptions. As Rose pointed out, one of the cuneiform readings was for a period of "five months and sixteen days." But in this older source, this is changed to "two months and six days." One of the Babylonian months and days, Nisan 9 is changed in the book to the month Ayar 29, while the month and day, Ulul 29, is changed to Ab 5. Each of these changes made by these investigators supports Huber's preconceptions and thus this old translation is not obsolete or erroneous. What Huber has chosen to do is use not ...
60. Forum: In Defence of the Saturn Theory C&C Review 2002:1 [Journals] [SIS Review]
... James goes on to speculate about the source of this astronomical information in Hesiod and Plato: Determining their relative distances [of the outer planets] involves a complex, but manageable, calculation, which can be made if one knows the speeds of these planets. The discovery was not made by the Greeks. Credit seems to go to the Babylonians, the best astronomers of the ancient world. When exactly they made these deductions is still unknown but their mathematical abilities, as well as obsessive star-watching habit, were already sufficiently developed by at least 1500 BC' [14]. This is a very confused statement. As we shall see, there is no evidence whatsoever that the ...
Search powered by Zoom Search Engine Search took 0.039 seconds |
