Announcement

Collapse

Archeology 201 Guidelines

If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.

Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?

Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.

Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Giant Marble Cross Found in N. Pakistan Hints of Christianity’s Early Presence There

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • And we NEVER call one another "chum" --- only ARROGANT NUTTERS use that expression!
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

      But yeah, you don't make personal and abusive remarks. Uh-huh. Right. You realize that post of yours is going to haunt you for a long time, right?
      I will ask you one personal question. Does your wife "wear the pants" in your relationship?
      "It ain't necessarily so
      The things that you're liable
      To read in the Bible
      It ain't necessarily so
      ."

      Sportin' Life
      Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

        I will ask you one personal question. Does your wife "wear the pants" in your relationship?
        My dear, we both wear pants, unless we're in the bedroom. How misogynistically patriarchal and old fashioned of you to assume she would only wear skirts and dresses, not to mention one could interpret that as transphobic, what with the assigning of gender roles in such a way.

        For shame.
        Last edited by Gondwanaland; 01-10-2021, 08:24 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

          My dear, we both wear pants, unless we're in the bedroom. How misogynistically patriarchal and old fashioned of you to assume she would only wear skirts and dresses, not to mention one could interpret that as transphobic, what with the assigning of gender roles in such a way.

          For shame.
          I used a metaphor. However, thank you for your response.
          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

            I used a metaphor. However, thank you for your response.
            And I made personal observations about your choice of metaphor.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

              And I made personal observations about your choice of metaphor.
              From what you wrote it appears you thought I was being literal.
              "It ain't necessarily so
              The things that you're liable
              To read in the Bible
              It ain't necessarily so
              ."

              Sportin' Life
              Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                From what you wrote it appears you thought I was being literal.
                No, just mocking your question.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
                  No, just mocking your question.
                  Fair enough!
                  "It ain't necessarily so
                  The things that you're liable
                  To read in the Bible
                  It ain't necessarily so
                  ."

                  Sportin' Life
                  Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    Ah the quote mine.
                    Not at all. As someone who is constantly diligently dissecting posts I thought I'd return the favor. As the queen of parsing you should be honored for as they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

                    In any case, you directly asserted that you never called it "The kingdom of Herod" and yet you did. That is an incontrovertible fact. Adding the rest of the sentence wouldn't change the meaning of your statement, and since there wasn't anything omitted that was essential to clarifying it, it is not a quote mine. If you had thought differently you would have included it, but you didn't because there was nothing to include that changed its context.

                    Next time you might want to actually know what something means before ignorantly and erroneously bandying it about.
                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    It was not written as a proper noun [as, for example, one might write The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan].
                    IOW, "I didn't capitalize kingdom therefore I didn't write what I wrote."

                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    However, you managed to conflate two distinct and separate periods of history in two sentences because you cannot write coherently.
                    Hilarious coming from Miss "with regard to the discipline of history I know a great more than most of the contributors to these boards" who cites Trajan's Column, built by the Romans after the war with the Dacians in present day Romania as evidence that 40 some years earlier the Romans at Masada in present day Israel didn't employ slave labor to help construct the ramp they used to overrun the fort.

                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    Nor, despite your allegation, was Jesus of Nazareth ever a “subject of the Roman Empire”.
                    James D. Tabor, while not one of my favorite authorities[1], but nevertheless is a Professor of Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, where he also served as the Department's Chairman, would disagree with you.

                    And aren't you the one who is constantly demanding sources for everything someone says, and yet , once again you don't bother to do so yourself.

                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    Your comment on citizenship serves to confirm your lack of any understanding or credibility in relation to these topics. Entire books have been written on Roman Law and Citizenship, yet for you, an unaccredited and unsubstantiated jpg that states: Provinciales [edit] Provinciales were those people who fell under Roman influence, or control but who lacked even the rights even of the Foederati, essentially having only the rights of the ius gentium is considered sufficient to “prove” your case.
                    Odd that you aren't citing them in support of your assertion. In fact so far you haven't cited any sources that support your position.

                    You did try to bluff your way through by quoting Oxford Classical Dictionary but it didn't contain anything I had written. I even asked you "Care to show how that contradicts what I wrote?" but you didn't. I guess you didn't expect your bluff to be called. Just like you ignored my citation of William Ramsay's St. Paul the Traveler and Roman Citizen so you can pretend that all I offered was the jpg (which I should add came from Wikipedia's entry on Roman citizenship, under the section Classes of citizenship -- I said it was the first source I looked up)

                    Now according to the criteria that you established that means that "you are pusillanimous" because you avoided answering the former and refused to address the latter.

                    Likewise you have studiously avoided addressing how you huffed in response to my pointing out how you "almost never offer[ed] sources to refute mine" by showing that you had indeed provided one source. Just one. That pretty much shows that I was correct in spite of your claim "So that lie is exposed." I guess that is more cowardness on your part.

                    And again, you skipped right over and failed to address how you goofed by citing Trajan's Column as evidence concerning the siege of Masada while repeatedly accusing me of conflating "two distinct and separate periods of history"

                    And let's not forget that I've asked you twice to back up your claim that I had altered something.
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    An "edit" implies that I altered something in some way. Care to back that up?

                    ...

                    Again, an edit suggests an alteration. Do you care to substantiate this claim?


                    Like everything else here, you have refused to do so.

                    Moreover, as to your claim of my being pusillanimous, you added "as has been noted by others as well as myself" I noted that "you are the only one I know of who refers to me as being cowardly so please don't fabricate things to puff yourself up." And how did you respond? By once again trying to B.S. your way through. You said that Juvenal had also done so but when faced with the fact this was a lie you were forced to concede " I agree Juvenal called you a liar not a coward."

                    This has really turned around and bitten you on your strudel-filled tuchus hasn't it? Far more droll than your bizarre confusion over our interlocutions on the
                    "on the Jesus' childhood home discovered? thread, and certainly rivalling the amusement generated by your indignant reply that you provided all of one source to bolster your claims.

                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    However, such a scholarly citation is entirely keeping with your other equally scholarly citations such as an English language tour guide site that you consider proves the Arch of Titus was “built by Jewish slaves
                    And once again you are reduced to deliberate dishonesty. Apparently it is all you have given the number of times, including in the thread I mentioned it in as well as here in the post you are responding to:
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                    As I've repeatedly noted, including in the original thread, I provided sources like that to demonstrate how universally accepted my view was, not to use it as some sort of scholarly source. But you continue in your typical duplicitous manner to dishonestly pretend otherwise. You ignore the actual scholars that I lined up to refute your view and then focus on the sources I also listed to demonstrate how matter-of-factly the position I was espousing is viewed. This sort behavior is typical of your modus operandi.


                    And it should be noted that Israeli tour guard are licensed and heavily scrutinized by the government to ensure that they aren't conveying false information. The Israelis take it very seriously. So this isn't some kid who you can pick up off the street to lead you around for a few bucks like you wish to give the impression that he is.

                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    and a one page thumbnail article on Masada that you consider "covers the Roman Jewish wars".
                    Um, I cited
                    • "Simon "Si" Sheppard's The Jewish Revolt AD 66-74 where I read that Silva's besieging force included several thousand prisoners who would of course been used as slave labor."
                    • "Lon Abbott, a geology professor at the University of Colorado at Boulder, the siege ramp was largely constructed using slave labor."
                    • "Rabbi Ken Spiro, who also has a master's degree in history also says that the ramp used Jewish slave labor in its construction."
                    • "Robert DiPrizio, a military historian, in his Conflict in the Holy Land: From Ancient Times to the Arab-Israeli Conflicts, wrote: "After surrounding the fortress with eight military camps, the Romans oversaw in a nine-month period the construction by Jewish slave labor of an assault ramp to the top of Masada"."
                    • "Yigael Yadin, (who worked at some of the most important sites in the region, including the Qumran Caves, Masada, Hazor, Tel Megiddo) believed that Jewish slave labor was used to construct the ramp to deter the rebels from attacking the laborers during its construction"
                    • "Dean Smith, writing in History is Now magazine in a piece called Terrorists in the Roman Empire? The Sicarii in First Century Judea matter of factly writes that "The Roman forces apparently used Jewish slave labor from the sacking of Jerusalem to build a wall around Masada."

                    concerning Masada, only for you to first ignore Yadin and then try to hand wave him off because you claimed, again without providing a source like you demand of others, that he had buried the remains of some bones he found "with full military honours at the foot of the ramp in 1969" and DiPrizo as well by first saying he only had written about modern wars in the Middle East and when shown that was false then still tried to dismiss him because his book consisted of only one volume.

                    As for the Roman generals sending thousands of captured soldiers to be sold as slaves, I cited
                    • John Bodel's "Caveat emptor: toward a study of Roman slave-traders," published in the Journal of Roman Archaeology
                    • Jason Paul Wickham's The Enslavement of War Captives by the Romans to 146 BC
                    • Keith "K. R." Bradley, who wrote about connection between slavery and warfare made in the Digest (a.k.a., the Pandects) of Justinian noting that the definition of slavery provided by Florentius, the Roman praetorian prefect, was used by it, and which declared: Slaves (servi) are so called because commanders generally sell the people they capture and thereby save (servare) them instead of killing them. The word for property in slaves (mancipia) is derived from the fact that they are captured from the enemy by force of arms (manu capiuntur).
                    • William D. Phillips Jr.'s Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade
                    • Theresa Urbainczyk's Slave Revolts in Antiquity
                    • At the risk of citing Wikipedia, their article on the Conquest of the Iberian Peninsula relates this about Marcus Portius Cato (Cato the Elder), who commanded a consular army of two legions plus 15,000 Latin infantry and 800 cavalry there, "Seven forts of the Bergistani (who lived in the north of Hispania Citerior) revolted. They were reduced to submission without any serious fighting. Cato returned to Tarraco, but they rebelled again and this time, when he defeated them again, he sold all into slavery to discourage further rebellion."


                    Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                    You are trying desperately to avoid answering my question re Spartacus’ alleged Roman citizenship by deflecting to other comments. So let us state for the record that Florus never writes that Spartacus was a citizen.

                    So from where did you obtain the information that permitted you to write;


                    That quote refers to historians. Who were /are these historians that support your contention that if Spartacus "was in the Roman army at the time, he was a citizen"?
                    For some reason you have decided to ignore my direct reply in order to maintain your false narrative

                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    Ah, so you deliberately ignored all of the times where I specifically stated it was a historian, even listing him by name to seek out the time when I accidentally wrote "historians" so that you could pounce upon it. How very petty. How typically H_A





                    1. Too much of a sensationalist and willing to entertain weakly supported claims, like some of those made by Simcha Jacobovici, although being willing to entertain a claim is still a far cry from supporting it.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                      Well I wiped the proverbial floor with you sunshine!
                      H_A.gif
                      You sure did

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

                        From what you wrote it appears you thought I was being literal.
                        He was quite obviously mocking you.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          snipped for irrelevance.
                          Well you clearly do like to waste your time regurgitating unrequested and unrelated comments.

                          However, you have still not answered my specific question which concerned the status of Spartacus.

                          From what source[s] did you obtain the information that permitted you to write this;
                          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                          If he was in the Roman army at the time, he was a citizen. Or is yet something else you know about and disagree with the historians over?
                          Kindly list all those historians who support your contention that Spartacus was a Roman citizen.

                          It really is a very simple question.​​​​​​​
                          "It ain't necessarily so
                          The things that you're liable
                          To read in the Bible
                          It ain't necessarily so
                          ."

                          Sportin' Life
                          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            Many Austrians might have felt it necessary to do so in order to get a good job or promotion.
                            Certainly joining the Party offered a good career opportunity and also helped in gaining a degree of social status

                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            But Arnold's father joined before the Germans took over Austria and became the dominant, controlling force
                            Did Gustav join before March 12 1938?

                            Your source [a newspaper article] tells us that he joined the SA in May 1939 that is over a year after the Anschluss. As for Arnold's "understanding about things like Kristallnacht is a bit "confused" and muddied at best." Kristallnacht was in November 1938 and occurred throughout the German Reich [which by then included Austria and areas of the Sudetenland
                            ]. I am sure as a little boy he would heard accounts about it.


                            I am still waiting for an answer to my question.

                            "It ain't necessarily so
                            The things that you're liable
                            To read in the Bible
                            It ain't necessarily so
                            ."

                            Sportin' Life
                            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              Certainly joining the Party offered a good career opportunity and also helped in gaining a degree of social status
                              Which is what I said. But trying to join things like the SA indicate there was far more to it than that.

                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              Did Gustav join before March 12 1938?
                              Yes. Not much before, but before.

                              According to the founder of the Simon Wiesenthal Center and a friend of Der Ah-nold's, "His father was an early Nazi. He asked to become a member before the Anschluss" when Hitler's troops occupied Austria on March 11, 1938, he added. Actually it was the 12th when that took place. Apparently the reporter got his dates wrong.

                              While Ursula Schwarz, a historian at Vienna's Documentation Center for Austrian Resistance, says that it wasn't like he had much choice but to join the Army just like any Austrian man, it wasn't like that in his case he needed any prodding, what with his attempt to join the SA, which consisted of fanatical Nazi true believers. Or perhaps you want to tell us how they were misunderstood and were really a bunch of really swell guys preoccupied with being as saintly as possible.

                              And her statement sounds a bit like a holdover from the "Austrian victimhood myth" which remained strong well into the late 1980s and maybe 90s, until the government (due in part to being rocked by revelations of Kurt Waldheim's Nazi past) started acknowledging their collaborationist role during WWII.

                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              Your source [a newspaper article] tells us that he joined the SA in May 1939 that is over a year after the Anschluss. As for Arnold's "understanding about things like Kristallnacht is a bit "confused" and muddied at best." Kristallnacht was in November 1938 and occurred throughout the German Reich [which by then included Austria and areas of the Sudetenland. I am sure as a little boy he would heard accounts about it.
                              The source was relaying the discoveries made by the Simon Wiesenthal Center at the behest of Schwarzenegger's. And that little boy would probably had gotten much of his information and understanding from his family or at least what he heard explained by them. And considering that his father was a dyed-in-the-wool Nazi, those accounts and explanations were almost certainly going to be from a very slanted perspective. Hence his getting things completely backwards like not understanding that it consisted of the government instigating, largely through the paramilitary Sturmabteilung (the very same group his father sought to join!), an attack on a bunch of the country's citizens (the Jews) rather than a bunch of the country's citizens attacking the government.

                              Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              I am still waiting for an answer to my question.
                              And I'm waiting for the answer or at least a response no matter how feeble to something like a half a dozen that I raised which you unceremoniously "snipped" in that reply refusing to address or even acknowledge them.

                              But then what else can anyone expect, according to YOUR own criteria, from a coward.

                              Petard meet H_A. H_A meet petard. Let the hoisting commence.
                              Last edited by rogue06; 01-12-2021, 07:49 PM.

                              I'm always still in trouble again

                              "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                              "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                              "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                                And I'm waiting for the answer or at least a response no matter how feeble to something like a half a dozen that I raised which you unceremoniously "snipped" in that reply refusing to address or even acknowledge them.
                                Why should I bother? Either you have short term memory loss or you do not read my replies.

                                I addressed all those points in my last two posts on the Roman Fortifications thread. You never replied to either of them and when I commented upon your lack of response you informed me that you had “found better things to do”. I therefore recommend that you go back to that thread and read my last two posts.

                                As to my specific question, you have been asked several times over the last few days to answer it and you persistently refuse to do so. We both know why.

                                "It ain't necessarily so
                                The things that you're liable
                                To read in the Bible
                                It ain't necessarily so
                                ."

                                Sportin' Life
                                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 05:38 AM
                                0 responses
                                9 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by tabibito, 09-07-2023, 02:41 PM
                                30 responses
                                134 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X