Pantagathus
-
Posts
2,168 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Pantagathus
-
-
Hannibal-Liam Neeson, look at his profile against the coins of that time versus his appearence in batman begins!
I can agree with that
-
Pertinax,
The only one I have is the Penguin Classics version. Though, I totally understand your frustration. For me personally, I always want a translation that is the absolute truest (as possible) to the words put down by the original author. That way, one can get in the writer's head much better.
I get really agitated with abridgements and/or the taking of poetic license when certain literary scholars translate an old text. If they want to put their mark on something, they should go write their own darn book...
A wonderful example of translation diversity is the Odyssey. So far my absolute favorite translation is by W.H.D Rouse offered via Signet Classics. It's just a small no frills paperback but it's contents are richly exquisite.
Later I wanted a nice hard bound verion of the Odyssey for the shelf (not really considering the difference translation would make) and picked up a beautiful copy (binding wise). I was so dismayed by the translation that I immediately put it back. It was so streamlined and poeticized that Homer's story lost almost all the depth in it's presentation. Homer's wit was apparently lost on that scholar.
I guess that's the product of our societies ever shrinking vocabulary these days...
-
Russel Crowe would not be a good actor for a Hannibal movie.
THe goods actors would be Clive Owen for Hannibal and Juan Phoneix for Scipio Africanus.
Who agrees?
Zeke
Clive could pull off Hannibal but I give the big thumbs down on JP for Scipio.
It's really difficult to say. Mainly I'm of the school who sides with accuracy so the revisionist use of Denzel bothers me even though he's a tremendous actor. Though I'm sure my father will love it, the simple idea of Vin Diesel doing Hannibal makes me quite sick...
When I look at the ancient coin depictions of the Barca's (wide cheekbones, pointy nose, deep inset eyes) I think of a character actor like Gary Sinese; though I wouldn't really want to see him play Hannibal, voice isn't quite right. Mago maybe?
As for Scipio, we must remember that he was in his 20's when he first arrived in Spain and that is a very important aspect of the character in my eyes. Considering he looked like this I just don't know who could do it?:
-
Some people think that, if Mithraism is the astrological religion it appears to be, it might date from when the Sun was in the constellation of Taurus ... beyond 2000 BC.
I'm far from convinced, though.
Ursus,
What makes you suspect of the potential for the vast antiquity of the cult? Could it have not gone through many revisionary cycles leading to the Roman period?
Just curious. ^_^
-
It's bad. Most people associate Celtics with ireland, and the rest of Great Brittain. But Galicia in Spain is VERY Celtic. Many countries had a Celtic past that they no longer remember or really care about. Like when the bagpipe is thoght of you think of Ireland, but experts say the babgpipe may have come from Celtic Spain.
Their first mention of the bagpipe in writing is contained in annals of the Cantabarian War, whether that means they came from there (Galicia) originally is of course open to debate.
When one considers the hair & clothing of Xinjiang mummies, one could argue that branches (or neighbors) of the Scythians (Massagetae, Cimmerians or Issedones) had 'Celtic cultural affinities' if one uses the modern Celtic stereotype to classify them...
I personally think that what we (well the orthodox understanding...) now consider 'Celtic cultural affinities' have Neolithic roots when the people of Europe and Eurasia were much more homogeneous; genetically & culturally.
Uh so are we discussing about modern day Celtic nationalism or the past.If so, then its good because either way, you are identifying your cultural roots which is good to know.
Identifying your cultural roots is good, yes; but if there is confusion, misunderstanding & misrepresentation of those roots it can be a bad thing bad.
-
Wealthy Shipowner-Trader and Sufete of Gades...
-
LEG X,
I wasn't chastizing you when you posted about Carthage, just trying to get the facts (as presented) straight. Folks come here to find quick access to info (often for school) and it's only right to point them in the right direction.
So no worries...
As for that Kings of Africa stuff.................................... I better not say much beyond: "don't use it as reference material unless you are writing an article for the Black Panther Party"
Furthermore, it is correct that Carthage had different 'castes' determined by race per se but it can be well argued that Sub-Saharan "black" Africans were a very small minority. We must remember that (for the most part) to folks of the 1st Millennia BC, all Sub-Saharan Africans were considered Ethiopians; which meant "people with burnt faces."
In Carthage, you would have had:
1. Carthaginians (Phoenicians)
2. Libyo-Phoenician (Mixed as name implies. Semitic + Berber)
3. Numidians & Mauritanians (Berbers)
4. Traders (from anywhere & everywhere)
5. Slaves (from anywhere & everywhere)
-
Archaeologists found the oldest worked metal in Europe while excavating an early Neolithic village near the village of Dzhulyunitza in central Bulgaria, state TV reported Sunday. The 3 metal finds are 8,000 years old.
full article at BNN
I personally think this was probably the rule not the exception.
The lack of evidence is no doubt due to the human habit of recycling resources. For instance, bronze tools - weapons usually ended up in a scrap pile (if they weren't burried with someone) and were melted down - recast eventually. Much easier than obtaining new tin for a fresh casting...
Heck, telephone infrastructure in parts of Africa is so horrible because local artisians steal the copper wire for their art...
-
I've read some things recently that gave the convincing argument that the Mithras cult had it's roots all the way back in the Neolithic Revolution when people from Persia to Asia Minor were moving away from hunter-gatherer-herding to agriculture.
-
Yeah you're talking about the Tartessians...
Ah yes that is it! Can you profess to us about the Tartessians?
I'd like to learn more.Favonius,
I started a thread a while ago on the subject of Tartessus found here: The Tartessus Puzzle
Didn't get too many takers...
I've done some extensive research on the subject and have come to some interesting conclusions, namely that Tartessus didn't just sprout up ~ 1000 BC when the Phoenicians came calling.
What is still elusive and can only be guessed at is whether there was interaction between Tartessian/Iberians and the Eastern Mediterranean before the collapse of the Bronze age. I tend to think that the Phoenicians knew what they were going out there for; that they were in a sense re-establishing ties and not developing new ones per se.
Many scholars claim that it was the Phoenicians who taught the Tartessians how to mine the metals they sat on. That does not make sense at all. Why would the Phoenicians need them as a trade partner if they weren't already exploiting their own resources? Furthermore there appears to be both textual & archaeological evidence that the Tartessians were in fact mining innovators...
One of the best, and most overlooked clues regarding Tartessus can be found in Strabo's Chapter on Turditania. The Turditani as known to the Romano-Punic world are geographically the same people as the Tartessians we know from Greek classical literature.
Strabo's account which was most likely based on Polybius' from ~ 200 years earlier shows an absolute fascination with the cultural, economic & technological accomplishments of these people. One thing that has stood out to me in particular is the mention of how the Turditani men utilized "Egyptian Screws" (i.e. Archimedes Screws) to remove water out of their mines, something that quite evidently surprises Strabo.
Considering once again that this account is probably a reference to what Polybius witnessed in the 2nd Century BC (not long after Archimedes 'invented it'), I find it surprising and quite telling as well. Makes you wonder if this technology was actually brokered out of Iberia and was put to use in Egypt for irrigation purposes then Archimedes brought the idea back from there where he was given credit for it in Greek classical literature. (i.e. Diodorus, through Sicilian pride gave Archimedes the credit for it...).
Anyway, what seems to have happened to Tartessus proper (the actual city) is also conjecture but it seems likely that it's demise was due to both environmental (flooding of the Guadalquivir) and political forces.
It's my stance that in the 6th Century after Tyre finally fell to Nebuchadnezzar; Carthage wasn't obliged anymore to play nice with Tartessus as their Phoenician forefathers had. I think that Carthage made an aggressive move on the Tartessian power center ~ 535 BC to finally monopolize their control over the Western Med. I think that is why all of a sudden Carthage sent Himlico & Hanno out on their explorations of the Atlantic shortly thereafter in the 5th Century... Before that, Tartessus controlled those routes (to the 'Tin Islands') and after, Carthage had to figure them out for themselves...
Ultimately, we don't know anything for certain because what ever was known was most likely found in Carthage's libraries. Though the Romans took care to copy much of those works before they torched the place, information on Tartessus would have been a serious hot potato seen as how the Turditani had already revolted (197 BC) and the Romans were dealing with on going insurrection in Celtiberia. Anything that would have further empowered the Iberians in feeling that they deserved independence from Rome would have no doubt been suppressed.
Strabo said "These are the wisest amongst the Iberians. They have letters, and written histories of ancient transactions, and poems, and laws in verse, as they assert, six thousand years old"... wouldn't it be a windfall if some of those were finally found under the alluvial plain of the Guadalquivir...
-
Ibernia (spain and portugal) were ruled by africans(phynicians). than the romans invaded iberia in the first of the punic wars, than hannibal conquered it back, and than the Imperial Romans invaded it again in the second Punic war.
Not quite.
The Romans never set foot in Spain militarily until the outset of the 2nd Punic War. The 1st was fought for control of Sicily, Sardinia, etc...
Hamilcar Barca, Hannibals father began empire buliding in Spain after the end of the 1st Punic War in 237 BC (to prepare for renewed conflict with Rome per se)
Furthermore, the Carthaginians were not 'Africans' in the racial sense. They were Phoenician (semitic) colonists from Tyre which is in modern day Lebanon.
-
Might prove an interesting read!
I think one of my favorite accounts dealing with Helen & the Siege of Troy comes from one of Herodotus' anecdotes: Helen Detained in Egypt.
-
If any one knows anything on the history of Iberia could you please post it here. I really want to learn about my ancestors. Starting with the Iberians, then the Celts, the Visigoths, Roman invasion, et cetera. Also about Gaul. I've tried to find out about Ancient Iberia, but I didn't get much. Thanks.
As Ursus has said, it takes some leg work. There are not many one stop shops on the web in regards to Pre-Roman Spain. What's especially hard to find are unbiased accounts...
Ursus has given a good reader's digest with a few acceptions. To start with, the Iberian legacy goes well beyond 4,000 BC as many of the Magdalenian Culture sites (~18,000-11,000 BC) are on the Spanish side of the Pyrennes. That this truely is part of the Iberian legacy deals has to do with genetics. I just posted the following in the Pelasgian thread and am posting here because it's pertinant:
Perfect example is Spain, the Phoenician/Punic colonial influence which is primarily representative in the modern population by the presence of Haplogroup J. The frequency of that Haplogroup in the modern population is less that 10% (or there abouts) and is clustered where you would expect. (Costa del Sol, Adalusia, etc..)The dominant Y-Chromosome Haplogroup in Spain is M343(R1b) and is found at the astounding frequency of ~80% +/- of the modern population with the highest concentrations radiating out from the south slopes of the Pyrennes (i.e. Basque country). What I mean by astounding is that this genetic legacy goes back to when people carrying this very ancient genetic marker took up refuge in Iberia during the last glacial maximum. So the Romans, the Alans/Vandals & the Moors barely made a dent in the genetics of the indigenous population all the way into the modern age!
Furthermore, the biggest consequence from this data is that the whole presumption a 'Celtic' invasion of Iberia during the 1st Millennia BC is rubbish as is the presumtion that the Celtiberians were racially different from the southern Iberians & the Lusitanians. There may have been an encrouchment of Celtic culture into Iberia when the Iberians in the north possibly adopted a Celtic 'Lingua Franca' from their trading partners, but there was no mass movement of people that caused a north & south genetic divide in Spain during the 1st Millennia BC...
Along those lines I refer also to the following article (beware again - thick with jargon!) which deals with the matrilinear markers in geneography:
High-resolution mtDNA evidence for the late-glacial resettlement of Europe from an Iberian refugium
The Pre-Roman Iberians are a facinating people and don't believe any source that claims they were a bunch of uncivilized yokles before the Phoenicians arrived to trade with them...
-
Seljuk Turks invaded Asia Minor only in the 11th century (at least 1000 years after the etruscans dissapeared, right?) , so if i understand this correct, although 1000 years of turkic rule, those people still have the genetic footprint of people that lived 2000 years prior? interessting...
regards
viggen
For the most part Viggen, the answer is yes.
In fact it's not uncommon for >60% of a given population in the old world to have genetic markers constant for 10,000 years...
Perfect example is Spain, the Phoenician/Punic colonial influence which is primarily representative in the modern population by the presence of Haplogroup J. The frequency of that Haplogroup in the modern population is less that 10% (or there abouts) and is clustered where you would expect. (Costa del Sol, Adalusia, etc..)
The dominant Y-Chromosome Haplogroup in Spain is M343(R1b) and is found at the astounding frequency of 80%-90% of the modern population with the highest concentrations radiating out from the south slopes of the Pyrennes (i.e. Basque country). What I mean by astounding is that this genetic legacy goes back to when people carrying this very ancient genetic marker took up refuge in Iberia during the last glacial maximum. So the Romans, the Alans/Vandals & the Moors barely made a dent in the genetics of the indigenous population all the way into the modern age!
Furthermore, the biggest consequence from this data is that the whole presumption a 'Celtic' invasion of Iberia during the 1st Millennia BC is rubbish as is the presumtion that the Celtiberians were racially different from the southern Iberians & the Lusitanians. There may have been an encrouchment of Celtic culture into Iberia when the Iberians in the north possibly adopted a Celtic 'Lingua Franca' from their trading partners, but there was no mass movement of people that caused a north & south genetic divide in Spain during the 1st Millennia...
I hope that makes sense
-
Speaking of Celtic nationalism, what are people's thoughts on it? Does it go too far?
Yes, it does.
I feel it's a sad confusion-corruption of misunderstood historical ethnic affinities.
-
Interesting stuff! Thanks for the link.
You're very welcome
-
This is VERY interesting!Do you have any sources to have more in depth information? Like books (hopefully reliable ones) or anything else?
It's true, we tend to see things from a merely linguistic perspective and tend to analyse and take into consideration only written texts to prove connections, whereas maybe other sciences would be more helpful..
If this was confirmed a lot of things could be explained. =)
Silentium,
I'll try to put together a bibliography of sorts if you'd like. This hypothesis (linking the diaspora from Asia Minor to the 4th Millennia) isn't really found yet in academic circles... However, I guaranty that this isn't 'tin foil hat' assertions.
As for the scientific conclusion between the genetic affinity with modern Turkish & North African populations I refer you here: The Etruscans: A Population Genetic Study (Beware... Thick with jargon!)Genetic Geneology is a rather new science and the tools are changing monthly. Not many people are applying it yet to multidisciplined approaches in an effort to solve old mysteries like this. I started working on this particular research about a month ago. To come to this conclusion I have used:
Myth:
Typhons 'Attack'
Leto's giving birth to Apollo & Artemis
Myths associated with the peopling of Sardinia
Myths associated with the peopling of Crete
Anecdotes by Pausanias
Ancient History:
Herodotus' accounts dealing with the Etruscans & Pelasgians
Anecdotes by Pliny
Anecdotes by Strabo
Anecdotes by Diodorus
Anecdotes by Pausanias
Archaeology:
Excavations of Catal Huyuk in Asia Minor (7th-5th Millennia BC)
Excavations in regards to the Vinca Culture (Balkins - 4th Millennia BC) ***Tartaria Tablet***
Excavations in regards to the Ozieri Culture (Pre-Nurghic Sardinia - 4th Millennia BC)
Excavations at Knossoss (Crete - 4th/3rd Millennia BC)
Excavations at Tarquinia (Etruscan Tombs)
Excavations at Caere (Etruscan Tombs)
Geology:
Climatric Catastrophy studies focused on 4th Millennia BC Asia Minor (Lake Van)
Genetic Geneology (Studies on Frequecy Distribution of Haplogroups):
J2e1 (M102)*
J2 (M172)
Religion - Cult iconography & 'origins' of:
Neolithic 'Mother Goddes' (Leto)
Dionysus - 'Fufluns'
Apollo - 'Aplu'
Artemis - 'Artumes/Artini'
Hermes - 'Turms'
Heracles - 'Horcle/Hercle'
(One of the key links through these is the iconography of the Bull & Leopard. The leopard {whom was Dionysus' companion} was perticulary 'revered' in Catal Huyuk, Asia Minor {where they still were found in the Neolithic}, the skin of which seems to have been the primary ceremonial garb for those people)
Really. modern, multidisciplined approachs are the only way to get to the bottom of old mysteries. Myth, ancient history, archaeology, geology, religion and liguistics are all needed to even come close to acceptable conclusions.
Hope this gives you more comfort in accepting my assertions.
-
I have some problems with this use of modern day genetic coding to figure the migratory patterns of humans. I admit, it is in part due to the fact that I am not completly up to speed on the research on the specific genes they track and why they seem to think them reliable.
My first point/question is are these genes even an acceptable marker? Genes have funny ways of spreading themselves around in counter-intuititive ways. Just because there is a case where one gene was used to track a human or other species population does not mean that it works for them all.
Another consideration is the dominant or recessive nature of this gene. If the Celts over-ran Brittania, killed all male men and children and raped the women, if the native population has a dominent form of the gene then it will be dominant in their bastard offspring and seem as if no migration happened. Why not track a male gene instead? Where are these samples being taken and via what unbiased method?
The markers used in genographic studies have nothing to do with dominant & recessive genes. For men, they use a marker on the Y chromosome that is always passed down patrilinearly. IF there is a mutation of the gene and that marker, it's called a "Founder Event" and a new branch to the tree is differentiated. Still, one can trace the dna code from that root lineage. This is how everything is traced back to the 'Out of Africa' event.
For women (& men from their matrilinear side), the same concept is applied in the study of mtDNA or mitochondrial DNA.
Using you're killing & raping senario, this is where analyzing the results does get tricky but it doesn't detract from the study. For example, if you test a male from latin America you'll most likely find a European Y chromosome marker but if you test his mtDNA you'll get one of the 4 Native American markers.
So, if the Celts had really invaded the British Isles & Ireland you would expect to find R1b M343 at much lower levels. If in fact the indigenous male population had been displaced...
In an effort to do the most comprehensive an unbaised study to date, National Geographic has lanched The Genographic Project which will add a lot more to what we currently know from independent studies.
I've read a lot of independant studies and though they can be pretty thick with jargon, the science is solid.
-
Yes..I was wondering that because I recently read an essay by someone in which he wrote a lot of rather improbable theories about Vesta and the Etruscan Pantheon..(in a desperate attempt to demonstrate the common Pelasgian origin of certain Greeks and the Etruscans, due to the fact that the Etruscan alphabet was similar to the archaic Greek one). Besides, as far as I know the Etruscan language was non Indo-European, whereas the [classic] Greek is Indo-European. I'm sure that's revisionism. At first I thought his argumentations were quite convincing, that's why I asked about the simultaneous spread of the cult, but later comparing other sources it came out how wrong that whole text is. Vesta's origins can't be non Indo-European.. I'd like to slap myself for taking that stuff seriously lol. I should stop reading that sort of stuff and surrender to the fact the origins of the Etruscans are unknown.
Don't be too harsh on yourself...
Everybody gets so caught up on the 'Indo-Europeans' which now seems to be more just a language spread than a racial one.
Current Genetic Geneography seems to finally provide the connection between Asia Minor, The Pelasgians & the Etruscans. That connection is Y Chromosome haplogroup J2 (M172). The account that Herodotus told of their Lydian origins now seems to not be mutually exclusive with the Pelasgian origins of the Etruscans. People have just never looked far enough back.
It appears now that ~ 4th Millennia BC there was a terrible drought in Asia Minor that sent those people scrambling for new lands. All of a sudden people the Vinca culture blossoms in the Balkins, the Nurghic culture appears in Sardina, Minoan civilization appears and so do the proto-Etruscans. All have similar cult iconography and mythic themes.
Now, J2 (M172) is found in the same frequency in all these areas with the ground zero being Asia Minor. ***Edit - The Sub Group (of the aforementioned J2) representative of the Etruscans should probably be pointed out to be J2e1 (M102)***
How do you connect the dots?
-
i dont want to be nitpicking but behind the Hadrian Wall lived the Picts and it is not proven that those people were celtic...
cheers
viggen
I'm going to stand behind Viggen here. The Irish and indigenous Bretons were not "Celts" in fact, up until the end of the first millennia BC, the only "Celt" found there would have been a trader...
Furthermore, modern genetic geneography is producing results that is really going to require a paradigm shift in the way we look at historic migratory waves. What the data indicates is that the only migrations that had profound impact on the genetic composition of people in western europe occured in prehistory, i.e. the Paleolithic. (>10,000 BC)
Prime example is the percent distribution of Y chromosome haplogroup M343 (R1b). This comprises 80% - 90% of Ireland & Iberia and 70% of modern Brittan. These were the Magdalenians of the paleolithic and the megalith builders.
The current consensus is that the true "Celts" derived from Y chromosome haplogroup M170 (I). Unless the Celtic "Invasion" of Ireland was accomplished by women only it in fact doesn't seem to have ever occured...
-
Diegis,
I could go on and on in regards to what you brought up. In fact, I think the more one investigates the issue, the less controversial it really is.
Ever since reading Mary Settegast's book 'Plato Prehistorian' I've looked at pre Bronze Age Europe in a different light and have investigated many aspects of the autochthous' peoples around the Mediteranian. What I've come accross continues to facinate me because it really does seem to support Plato's Critias account.
One of the most compelling things I've come across regards various aspects of Hercules & Hermes. Both are originally of Pelasgian origin. Both have a myth relating to the theft of cattle; Hermes' first mythic act was the theft of Apollo's cattle as an infant and Hercules' 10th labor was to steal Geryon's cattle in Iberia.
When I was looking at one black figure vase depiction of Hercules fighting Geryon, I was stuck by one thing. Instead of his usual lion skin, he was wearing a spotted leopard skin that was remarkablly reminicant of the Catal Huyuk (7th-5th Millennia BC) depictions of bearded men clad in leopard skins surrounding either a stag or bull.
In fact, the mythic battle between Hercules & Geryon may be an extremely clear, concise summary of the west
-
Wynde27,
If you are still monitoring this, my deepest apologies for taking so long to get back to it. The thread went untouched for quite a while and I quit checking it.
It would seem that your assumtions are close to mine. If you don't mind me asking, in what regards are you folding Tartessus into a novel?
I've done a lot of research but in the end there really isn't a whole lot out there that really answers some of the main questions. I've read every ancient source that even whispers about it and I've read every anecdote by the ancient geographers in regards to the area around the Guadalquivir.
For modern works, Barry Cunliffe's "Facing the Ocean" helps a bit but he's Celto-Centric so he falls into the trap of using the 'party line' when it comes to Tartessus.
Most of the others are too focused on the Phoenicians and Greeks (because it's easy) and fail to step out on a limb and speculate in regards to Tartessian power & influence without the concrete evidence of the city itself...
My recommendation is to absorb all you can from a wide variety of sources (because they vary widely) and come to your own conclusion.
One hint I'll give you is to take heed of Strabo's facination with the Turditani in his chapters on Iberia... Many many clues about the Tartessians can be found in the desciption of their legacy...
-
It would seem that we haven't answered one of your main quetions. If one accepts that the 'Cyclopean' architecture is in fact of Pelasgian origin, then by that deduction it would seem likely that the Mycenaeans were in fact mostly Pelasgians...
-
"Pelasgi
(Pelasgoi).
A name given to the earliest (prehistoric) inhabitants of Greece. In Homer the name applied now to a people in Asia Minor dwelling near Ilium ( Il.ii. 840), and now to people inhabiting various parts of Greece. Thus, Argos is called Pelasgian (id ii. 681), and the god worshipped at Dodona is the
Marcus Aurelius-meditations, Alternative Editions.
in Libri
Posted
The answer to the "why not use it" question seems to find some roots in your mention of a shift to "easy language"
Everything is dumbed down. Good forbid make someone have a dictionary beside them when reading a book!?!
When I was in the Navy, I used to put a word of the day on the little grease pencil board in the jet engine test cell where I worked. Most of the guys thought I was a dork but I had other guys tell me after most of us got out that they really appreciated the intellectual pilot light that I kept lit for them.
On the otherhand, I get so frustrated these days when people treat me as if I'm being pretentious just because I try to make use of the vocabulary I've accumulated throughout the years. They get almost offended as if I'm condescendingly talking over their heads or (much worse) as if I'm cursing them in some foreign language just because I use expanded vocabulary.
We're loosing 'class' & refinement quick in today's society and Reality TV is putting us on an exponential curve at breakneck speed.
All I know is that when I see a young lady that catches my eye, the word "hot" will not enter my mind as an appropriate adjective. "Salacious" however, does...
Anyway Pertinax, we're obviously on the same page. Nuance and subtlety does not stem from simple language. It comes from using particularly chosen vocabulary that has no match in conveying enourmous concepts in a word verses a sentance of lazy words...
Old translations using defunct slang is just as bad as a modern writer taking poetic license.