sylla

From all people, are you asking me for negative evidence? (i.e., evidence for what the Greek culture was not? ). I would have expected you to give some objective positive evidence on your own. In any case, the public space of the vast majority of human cultures all across History has not been restricted to aliens, so all of them would have been equally "universal" under such wide criterion. Hardly surprisingly, Quisling was a fervent defender of the relevance of the Nordic (Norwegian) mythology for the Nazi paraphernalia.Any account is as good as its sources, and those of Josephus are excellent... but for the Antiochus' decree, entirely Jewish. I have impugned the reliability of the traitor "terrorist" Josephus specifically on the analysis of the nature of the national movement that he had so utterly betrayed; how could I not? A really immense intellectual effort would be required to ignore such an evident fact. Unsurprisingly, our dear treacherous "terrorist" Josephus was a fervent defender of the Jewish tradition (naturally under the most absolute Roman rule) simply because he and his family were Jews (analogous to Quisling, BTW ). In all seriousness, you can't ignore all early Christian historical traditions were based on the Jewish tradition; mostly Josephus and the Maccabees books in this case. Check out on Attalus.org again and you will verify that the story of the anti-Jewish religious decree issued by Antiochus IV is entirely absent from Hellenic and Latin sources, including his hostile contemporary Polybius.

That figure is in the upper limit of the quoted range and probably a bit exaggerated, but in general terms your analysis seems to be perfectly right. However, the loss of thousands of high quality warriors should probably never be described as "minimal", especially if it included so many high-rank officials and the Emperor himself. In any case, the relevance of this battle for the demise of the Western Empire has been presumably highly overrated; after all, it was the eventually surviving Eastern Empire which was defeated here.

Yep...I referenced those first two... J Sorry, my bad.

From the first link, "Earliest Chemical Warfare Dura-Europos, Syria" and "Palace of Mithradates, Kuban, Russia" seem to qualify as Roman-related too; also "A Lost City in Istanbul" from the extended list.

You perfectly know that Josephus was a rebel traitor, a Jewish turncoat and a Flavian client (in fact, a former "terrorist"); I'm sure you have no trouble in perceiving his evident and understandable bias against his former comrades. Please check it out on Livius.org.

The common claim that the Macedonian & Hellenistic Greeks aspired to "create an advanced universal culture" is hard to justify even for Alexander III, virtually impossible for the II century BC Seleucides; it is essentially unhistorical. Classical & Hebrew theologies had lived together (even in close contact) under the Ptolemies and earlier Seleucids, entirely peacefully most often than not. The origin of the Maccabean revolt was probably far more secular, at least on the Syrian side; the annoying tendency of the late Seleucids to pillage temples (especially after their disastrous defeats against the Roman legions) seems like a far better explanation to me. In any case, the radical decree of Antiochus forcing the Jews to adopt Hellenic customs and make pagan sacrifices is conspicuously absent from non-Jewish sources.

Read carefully; I did not analyze Josephus ethical issues , but just his reliability as a source for the nature of the Jewish rebels... As virtually nothing of your last post relates to my last post, we may even agree; who knows ?

Probably because they had many competent archers (most on horseback) and archers are superior to crossbowman. The crossbow was a bit like the arquebus would be later: powerful and easier to master by less trained recruits but with a slower rate of fire. Again, can you quote your sources? What is the evidence that the late Romans "lag behind" in this issue? And for what period? Just the Crusades? After all, "Byzantine" encompasses more than a thousand years.

We may not be following the same line of reasoning. The Spanish garum of these amphorae was in all likelihood consumed in Rome or Italy; far as I'm aware, Alexandria doesn't seem to have been a relevant partner in such trade. The re-use of the amphorae for diverse purposes is indeed well attested. My point is that the origin of the Indian trade was presumably Rome (i.e. where the emptied amphorae rested), not Alexandria; "direct" doesn't imply the same vessel was used for all the travel ; Alexandria and Berenike were probably just steps, not the final destiny of the trade. My question is what (if any) content was in the amphorae for their travel eastwards; Garum? Nothing? Anything else? The thesis of the authors for the return content (pepper) seems plausible, but it naturally requires some additional confirmation; in any case, it seems most people agree the most economically relevant portion of the circuit was the travel back (westwards). And of course, the traders may well have been Indians (or even third parties), and not necessarily Mediterraneans, as implied by the article.

Can you quote your sources?

Be careful; this old story seems to be absolutely nonsense and may well be entirely bogus.

It would be interesting to determine what the content of the amphorae (if any) was in their travel to India; I

It seems like a little more of the same; both sides have political motivations, so the solution can only be more politics. We can only hope that any actual or potential research is not hindered by politics, a risk which honestly seems currently unlikely for this case. There's a priori no reason why the "global context" should be any better in one place than the other.

Neither do I; in any case, better classical linguistic abilities than mine would be required to define if the language employed by Suetonius above necessarily implied a passive homosexual role from Caesar ...

Sadly, Mr. Radhakrishnan's article seems not to make justice to Cherian & Tomber research It's not clear if the coins and additional artifacts were considered Roman, Indian or from any other place.Besides, "1100 fragments" could be any number of amphorae, from one to 1100. Please note that, if properly sampled and analyzed, the carbon date would just be the terminus post quem for the non-wooden artifacts; i.e. they could have come from any later date.

Usus autem sum, ne in aliquo fallam carissimam mihi familiaritatem tuam, praecipue libris ex bibliotheca Ulpia, aetate mea thermis Diocletianis, et item ex domo Tiberiana, usus etiam [ex] regestis scribarum porticus porphyreticae, actis etiam senatus ac populi. 2 et quoniam me ad colligenda talis viri gesta ephemeris Turduli Gallicani plurimum invit, viri honestissimi ac sincerissimi, beneficium amici senis tacere non debui. 3 Cn. Pompeium, tribus fulgentem triumphis belli piratici, belli Sertoriani, belli Mithridatici multarumque rerum gestarum maiestate sublimem, quis tandem nosset, nisi eum Marcus Tullius et Titus Livius in litteras rettulissent? 4 Publ<i>um Scipionem Afric<an>um, immo Scipiones omnes, seu Lucios seu Nasicas, nonne tenebrae possiderent ac tegerent, nisi commendatores eorum historici nobiles atque ignobiles extitissent? 5 longum est omnia persequi, quae ad exemplum huiusce modi etiam nobis tacentibus usurpanda sunt. 6 illud tantum contestatum volo me et rem scripsisse, quam, si quis voluerit, honestius eloquio celsiore demonstret, et mihi quidem id animi fuit, 6 <ut> non Sallustios, Livios, Tacito<s>, Trogos atque omnes disertissimos imitarer viros in vita principum et temporibus disserendis, sed Marium Maximum, Suetonium Tranquillum, Fabium Marcellinum, Gargilium Martialem, Iulium Capitolinum, Aelium Lampridium ceterosque, qui haec et talia non tam diserte quam vere memoriae tradiderunt. 8 sum enim unus ex curiosis, quod infi[ni]t<i>as ire non possum, ince<n>dentibus vobis, qui, cum multa sciatis, scire multo plura cupitis. 9 et ne diutius ea, quae ad meum consilium pertinent, loquar, magnum et praeclarum principem et qualem historia nostra non novit, arripiam.

So do I.

Post deleted

Must agree with MPC here; to begin with, it's quite likely that the native American ancestors were still not in the Great Lakes area 14,000 years ago... Floodings are not uncommon, either in legends or in the real world; besides, there's no need to find a real-life equivalent for any single myth. It's easy to verify that the reliability of the transmission of the oral tradition is rather poor in comparison with written records. The literary interference from the Hellenic (especially Athenian) history with the Roman oral tradition for the fall of ther semi-legendary monarchy goes even farther; the tale of Lucretia seems suspiciously similar to the downfall of the Peisistratid tyranny, precipitated by the assassination of Hipparchus after his failed homosexual attempt for Harmodius.

Thanks and congratulations; the great relevance of these articles is not so much for the reported findings of trivia, but for critical methodological and epistemological issues; e.g. what is "truth" for Archaeology and History? A careful review of this material is a must for anyone that tries to analyze archaeological or historical evidence.As for any other science, skepticism must be compulsory, simply because knowledge can only be acquired by testing the falsifiability of any hypothesis or conjecture; i.e. by systematically trying to refute them (critical rationalism). That would be nice, of course as long as we remember that the same mechanisms operative for hoaxes being made and people falling for them (e.g. greed, pride, revenge, nationalism, pranks, gullibility and so on) work nicely in both ways; just think about Holocaust denial...

The story indicates that the catastrophe that caused this city's destruction was well after the destruction of Helike and Thera which are being discussed here. Just for the record; 365 AD would be the 4th century (not the 2nd).

From that review and the preview in Amazon.com, it seems the biological and toxicological approach of this book is absolutely sensationalistic and unscientific.

Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan. John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Offending post deleted