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

Cerne Giant in Dorset dates from Anglo-Saxon times, analysis suggests

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    You're my inspiration for that.
    Given your latest faux pas both on this thread re the Littlington White Horse and your confusion over natural philosophers and antiquarians, along with your categorical statement that there was no evidence for Pontius Pilate "outside of Christian sources" I recommend you look in the mirror..


    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    He would have been considered a "natural philosopher" which was essentially the term used for "scientist" back then
    He was not a natural philosopher although he knew several. He was an antiquarian/antiquary. There is a distinct difference between the two interests and pursuits.

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    Your point especially given I specifically mentioned that they were geologists?
    Geologists are not antiquarians.

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    I never said otherwise.
    You wrote that "it being Anglo-Saxon, which is what was first suggested back in the 17th cent".

    That statement is not supported by the text you cited from Wiki.

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    The citation even makes it crystal clear that these 17th cent references "associated it,
    No it doesn't. The Wiki extract states that this site was first mentioned in the seventeenth century.

    The next sentence in that extract starts with "Early antiquarians associated it, on little evidence, with a Saxon deity". It gives no date for those "Early antiquarians". They may have been from the 1700s or later.

    You therefore made an unfounded assumption when you wrote "it being Anglo-Saxon, which is what was first suggested back in the 17th cent".
    "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
      Given your latest faux pas both on this thread re the Littlington White Horse and your confusion over natural philosophers and antiquarians, along with your categorical statement that there was no evidence for Pontius Pilate "outside of Christian sources" I recommend you look in the mirror..
      Given your shock and doubt concerning that we've known for centuries who the intended audiences for the Gospels were and many similar incidents of expressed ignorance of what should be the basics of a topic you sought to pontificate about... And I'm not the one posing as an actual historian

      Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
      He was not a natural philosopher although he knew several. He was an antiquarian/antiquary. There is a distinct difference between the two interests and pursuits.
      And the utter arrogant ignorance rears its head yet again.

      Source: John Aubrey


      John Aubrey FRS (12 March 1626 – 7 June 1697) was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer.

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Source: The Antiquary: John Aubrey's Historical Scholarship


      John Aubrey (1626–1697), antiquary, natural philosopher, and virtuoso...

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Archiving the Inventor of the Archive: Scholarship traces the birth of the archive to natural philosophers like John Aubrey

      Source: John Aubrey


      John Aubrey (March 12 1626June 7 1697) was an English biographer, natural philosopher, antiquary and folklorist.

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Source: The Natural History of Wiltshire by John Aubrey


      [*In the ABOUT JOHN AUBREY section:*]

      John Aubrey FRS was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Source: John Aubrey Mar 12, 1626 - Jun 7, 1697


      John Aubrey FRS was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer

      Source

      © Copyright Original Source



      Does this from the first page of a search for Aubrey natural philosopher suffice to demonstrate your ignorance in this matter or will you regale us with another round of desperate defensive pleading that we all have come to expect from you when you're shown to be wrong oh Ms. faux pas?

      Professional historian my... eye.

      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)
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        Given your shock and doubt concerning that we've known for centuries who the intended audiences for the Gospels were and many similar incidents of expressed ignorance of what should be the basics of a topic you sought to pontificate about... And I'm not the one posing as an actual historian


        And the utter arrogant ignorance rears its head yet again.

        Source: John Aubrey


        John Aubrey FRS (12 March 1626 – 7 June 1697) was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer.

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Source: The Antiquary: John Aubrey's Historical Scholarship


        John Aubrey (1626–1697), antiquary, natural philosopher, and virtuoso...

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Archiving the Inventor of the Archive: Scholarship traces the birth of the archive to natural philosophers like John Aubrey

        Source: John Aubrey


        John Aubrey (March 12 1626June 7 1697) was an English biographer, natural philosopher, antiquary and folklorist.

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Source: The Natural History of Wiltshire by John Aubrey


        [*In the ABOUT JOHN AUBREY section:*]

        John Aubrey FRS was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Source: John Aubrey Mar 12, 1626 - Jun 7, 1697


        John Aubrey FRS was an English antiquary, natural philosopher and writer

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Does this from the first page of a search for Aubrey natural philosopher suffice to demonstrate your ignorance in this matter or will you regale us with another round of desperate defensive pleading that we all have come to expect from you when you're shown to be wrong oh Ms. faux pas?

        Professional historian my... eye.
        He was not a natural philosopher in the definition of a propensity for studying the natural world and the universe. As you seem to favour Wiki here is what it says about antiquarians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquarian

        An antiquarian or antiquary (from the Latin: antiquarius, meaning pertaining to ancient times) is an aficionado or student of antiquities or things of the past. More specifically, the term is used for those who study history with particular attention to ancient artifacts, archaeological and historic sites, or historic archives and manuscripts.

        And as Kelsey Jackson Williams notes in the introduction to his biography of Aubrey: See page 7

        At the same time that classical antiquaries were defining their subjects of study with ever greater precision, antiquarian techniques were being deployed to reshape understandings of the ancient and medieval history of northern Europe. Scholars as diverse as George Hickes in England, Jean Jacques Chifflet in France, Ole Worm in Denmark, and Olof Rudbeck in Sweden used the tools forged by earlier generations of predominantly classically focused antiquaries to construct interpretations of the histories of non-classical civilizations. These scholars, like their predecessors, engaged with the full range of antiquarian subjects, from manuscripts, at the philological end of the spectrum, through the mixed media of coins and inscriptions, to a variety of artefacts, ruins, and sites at the archaeological end of antiquarian research. While engaged in an ongoing dialogue with antiquaries studying the classical world, these scholars built a more methodologically expansive toolbox in their pursuit of the non-classical past, liberally helping themselves to the practices not only of historians and philologists, but of natural philosophers and physicians. In Aubrey’s lifetime, a scholar could be described as an antiquary as a result of activities as diverse as editing saints’ lives and excavating prehistoric burial mounds, and could explain his findings with theoretical tools drawn from areas as widely separated as geology and comparative religion.

        [My emphasis].

        However, none of that eliminates the fact that you made an assumption about what your own Wiki link stated.
        Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 05-20-2021, 12:47 PM.
        "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post

          He was not a natural philosopher in the definition of a propensity for studying the natural world and the universe. As you seem to favour Wiki here is what it says about antiquarians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquarian

          An antiquarian or antiquary (from the Latin: antiquarius, meaning pertaining to ancient times) is an aficionado or student of antiquities or things of the past. More specifically, the term is used for those who study history with particular attention to ancient artifacts, archaeological and historic sites, or historic archives and manuscripts.

          And as Kelsey Jackson Williams notes in the introduction to his biography of Aubrey: See page 7

          At the same time that classical antiquaries were defining their subjects of study with ever greater precision, antiquarian techniques were being deployed to reshape understandings of the ancient and medieval history of northern Europe. Scholars as diverse as George Hickes in England, Jean Jacques Chifflet in France, Ole Worm in Denmark, and Olof Rudbeck in Sweden used the tools forged by earlier generations of predominantly classically focused antiquaries to construct interpretations of the histories of non-classical civilizations. These scholars, like their predecessors, engaged with the full range of antiquarian subjects, from manuscripts, at the philological end of the spectrum, through the mixed media of coins and inscriptions, to a variety of artefacts, ruins, and sites at the archaeological end of antiquarian research. While engaged in an ongoing dialogue with antiquaries studying the classical world, these scholars built a more methodologically expansive toolbox in their pursuit of the non-classical past, liberally helping themselves to the practices not only of historians and philologists, but of natural philosophers and physicians. In Aubrey’s lifetime, a scholar could be described as an antiquary as a result of activities as diverse as editing saints’ lives and excavating prehistoric burial mounds, and could explain his findings with theoretical tools drawn from areas as widely separated as geology and comparative religion.

          [My emphasis].

          However, none of that eliminates the fact that you made an assumption about what your own Wiki link stated.
          Is there some particular reason that you are ignoring that aside from Wiki I also provided sources from Oxford University Press, JSTOR and a few others? Perhaps this is this another example of your trick of deliberately trying to misrepresent the evidence presented so you can pretend that you didn't end up with the proverbial egg on your face.

          This is hardly the first time you've tried to pull this.

          I provided, in order, what I found on the front page of the most cursory of checks.

          Further, your quote does not say that he wasn't a natural philosopher but rather indicates that he could also be called an antiquarian. You know, sort of like how Stephen Hawking is a scientist who could be described as a theoretical physicist. This binary black-and-white thinking of yours is exactly what got you in trouble in the discussion about "contradictions" in the Gospel Resurrection accounts and it's doing it again here.

          I just finished (?) a discussion in Natural Science where I delved pretty deeply into various natural philosophers stretching from the Medieval Ages up through the early 19th cent[1] and Aubrey's name popped up from time to time while I looked for secondary confirmation for various points.





          1. it involved how even some of the most religious of them such as a Galileo, Boyle and Newton, still insisted on employing what would much later be called methodological naturalism in their work. they had little time for invoked miracles to explain things.

          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)
          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
            Is there some particular reason that you are ignoring that aside from Wiki I also provided sources from Oxford University Press, JSTOR and a few others?
            Is there some particular reason you failed to recognise your own source? I refer to Kelsey Jackson Williams, who is your "sources from Oxford University Press".

            And I found no JSTOR reference.


            "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful" Attrib. Seneca 4 BCE - 65 CE

            Comment

            Related Threads

            Collapse

            Topics Statistics Last Post
            Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-14-2021, 05:43 AM
            19 responses
            117 views
            1 like
            Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
            Working...
            X