Re: statistical modelling of Homer's writing

[Yusuf B Gursey]

On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:

interesting

> Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling of
> language evolution are found to date to 710–760 BCE
>
> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full

[Christopher Ingham]

On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> interesting

Definitely. The time frame agrees with that which previously has been
proposed by the majority of Homerists.

Christopher Ingham

[Odysseus]

In article
<66dfc2d3-b837-4a46...@n11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,

Christopher Ingham <christop...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:

[sequence restored]

> > > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling of
> > > language evolution are found to date to 710–760 BCE
> >
> > >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full
> >

> > interesting
> Definitely. The time frame agrees with that which previously has been
> proposed by the majority of Homerists.

Hittite was a very apt choice of starting point for the interpolation!

I would note that the precision of the result is lessened not only by
the statistical breadth of the peak in the word-age distribution, but
also in proportion to the sum of the uncertainty in the date of Hittite
(+/-200 years, according to fig.1A) and double that in the date of its
latest IE ancestor in common with Greek. For each century by which the
estimated chronological distance between Hittite and Modern Greek is
increased or decreased, the date calculated for Homer will be about
twenty years earlier or later respectively.

--
Odysseus

[SolomonW]

One point I think interesting is that based on this is it quite possible
that it is same author for the The Iliad and The Odyssey.

[DKleinecke]

On May 9, 5:15 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 08 May 2013 23:40:05 -0600, Odysseus wrote:
> > In article

> > <66dfc2d3-b837-4a46-9271-193364c66...@n11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,

> >  Christopher Ingham <christophering...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >> On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> > [sequence restored]
>
> >>> > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling of
> >>> > language evolution are found to date to 710–760 BCE
>
> >>> >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full
>
> >>> interesting
> >> Definitely.  The time frame agrees with that which previously has been
> >> proposed by the majority of Homerists.
>
> > Hittite was a very apt choice of starting point for the interpolation!
>
> > I would note that the precision of the result is lessened not only by
> > the statistical breadth of the peak in the word-age distribution, but
> > also in proportion to the sum of the uncertainty in the date of Hittite
> > (+/-200 years, according to fig.1A) and double that in the date of its
> > latest IE ancestor in common with Greek. For each century by which the
> > estimated chronological distance between Hittite and Modern Greek is
> > increased or decreased, the date calculated for Homer will be about
> > twenty years earlier or later respectively.
>
> One point I think interesting is that based on this is it quite possible
> that it is same author for the The Iliad and The Odyssey.

My hypothesis about Homer is that he fixed the text because he made a
written copy and that the Greek script was adapted from Phoenician
while he was a youngish man. In the Iliad Homer was more of an editor
and revisor than an original author. Then having accomplished that he
went on to invent his own epic designed to please some family on Samos
that considered themselves descendents of Odysseus.
Meanwhile writing spread to mainland Greece where Hesiod was still
active. The last step in the spread of writing would be when it
reached Olympia and someone wrote down the list of winners for as far
back as the oral tradition could reach. Chronologically it all fits
together - whether it has any other value is an open question

[JTEM]

DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My hypothesis about Homer is that he fixed the text because he made a
> written copy and that the Greek script was adapted from Phoenician
> while he was a youngish man.  In the Iliad Homer was more of an editor
> and revisor than an original author. Then having accomplished that he
> went on to invent his own epic designed to please some family on Samos
> that considered themselves descendents of Odysseus.

The Trojan War appears to be nothing more than
a retalling (repackaging) of an Egyptian campaign
of Tuthmosis III against Joffa, where he managed
to capture the city after soldiers were smuggled
inside in baskets -- sometime in the 15th century
BC (BCE).

Ironically, this fact is often dismissed as
preposterous when the claim that the very same
historical events are remembered (in a manner of
speaking) in "Ali Babba and the Forty Thieves":

http://ib205.tripod.com/djehuty.html

So events of the 15th century BC can be alive even
today within Ali Babba, but somehow it's ridiculous
to note the obvious similarities with the Trojan
Horse...

And let's not forget: The archaeology doesn't support
Homer at all. So the only alternative to a
"borrowing" of a different tale is to claim it as a
wholesale invention...



-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com

[Peter T. Daniels]

Omigod. Someone believes the same as Barry B. Powell.

(The doofus who thinks that *The World's Writing Systems* was edited
by P. L. Daniels and P. T. Bright, and that Coulmas's *Blackwell
Encyclopedia of Writing Systems* has 80 contributors.)

[Franz Gnaedinger]

On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> > > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling of
> > > language evolution are found to date to 710–760 BCE
>
> > >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full

Ricardo Mansilla of the Free University of Mexico ran
a DNA taxonomy program on the Odyssey and found
that it was composed of material of a dozen or sixteen
or even more bards. I guess the Iliad was the same,
a compilation of bardic material gathered for some
four hundred years and then compiled in an epic.
I date the compiler of the Iliad to the first Messenian
War, the compiler of the Odyssey to the second
Messenian War. Both Homers feared the loss of
the Greek unity. Homer of the Iliad was concerned
that the mainland with Thessaly (Achilles) and the
Peloponnese (Menelaos) might fall apart, while the
Homer of the Odyssey feared the unity of the mainland
and islands and colonies could break up. One marked
difference among the two Homers is their understanding
of fate. The Homer of the Iliad says that all is done by
the gods, predestined by Zeus, whereas the Homer
of the Odyssey contradicts in the first book, not all
is predestined by the gods.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

On May 10, 6:47 pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > > > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling of
> > > > language evolution are found to date to 710–760 BCE
>
> > > >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full
>
> Ricardo Mansilla of the Free University of Mexico ran
> a DNA taxonomy program on the Odyssey and found
> that it was composed of material of a dozen or sixteen
> or even more bards.

About what you'd expect, I guess, when you feed a bunch of poetry into
a program that's expecting nucleotides. Was this one of the
universities established by the drug cartels for the benefit of brain-
damaged researchers?

[Agamemnon]

"Franz Gnaedinger" <fr...@bluemail.ch> wrote in message
news:cda3da53-b7a9-4f19...@l5g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...

On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> > > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling
> > > of
> > > language evolution are found to date to 710�760 BCE
>
> > >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full

<<<Ricardo Mansilla of the Free University of Mexico ran
a DNA taxonomy program on the Odyssey and found
that it was composed of material of a dozen or sixteen
or even more bards. I guess the Iliad was the same,
a compilation of bardic material gathered for some
four hundred years and then compiled in an epic.>>>

Which is why the statistical analysis can't be trusted to set anything but a
lower limit to the date of Homer. If you factor in the above then the
analysis should confirm the historical date for Homer accepted by the
majority of ancient historians which is 880 BC. Those arguing a later date
(who were in a tiny minority) were in fact confusing the Iliad which was
written by Homer with the Little Iliad which was written by Lesches of
Lesbos in 658 BC and placing the date of that at the start of the Annual
Archonship of Athens (Archilochus) or placed Homer in the reign of Pheidon.
If this was Phidon I (referred to in the Parian Marble) then it would date
Homer to 860 BC (which is the dating given by Herodotus). If what they
probably did was to confuse Phidon with Phidon II (probably surnamed Eratus
(referred to by Jerome and Pausanius)) their date for Homer would have been
about 780 BC.

<<<I date the compiler of the Iliad to the first Messenian
War, the compiler of the Odyssey to the second
Messenian War. Both Homers feared the loss of>>>

Those dates are completely unworkable since everyone is agreed that the
Iliad and Odyssey are the earliest Greek poetry next to Hesiod and later
authors such as Arctinus, of Miletus, Cynaethon of Lacedaemon and Eumelus of
Corinth who composed the Aethiopis and the Iliupersis which follow on from
the Iliad are all dated to the time of the first 8 Olympiads where the
dating of events was not disputed.

<<<the Greek unity. Homer of the Iliad was concerned
that the mainland with Thessaly (Achilles) and the
Peloponnese (Menelaos) might fall apart, while the
Homer of the Odyssey feared the unity of the mainland
and islands and colonies could break up. One marked
difference among the two Homers is their understanding
of fate. The Homer of the Iliad says that all is done by
the gods, predestined by Zeus, whereas the Homer
of the Odyssey contradicts in the first book, not all
is predestined by the gods.>>>

As you said above the Iliad and Odyssey are the works of multiple authors.
They were originally written long before Homer was even born and Homer
simply reworked them and later poets reworked them further still. The
original version of the Odyssey is attributed to Telemachus and the Iliad is
said to have been originally composed immediately after the capture of Troy.
These texts were originally purely historical and some poet or other decided
to insert the gods into them and then Homer got hold of them and
mythologized them further still.

[Agamemnon]

"Odysseus" <odysseu...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote in message
news:odysseus1479-at-BD...@news.eternal-september.org...

> In article
> <66dfc2d3-b837-4a46...@n11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
> Christopher Ingham <christop...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> [sequence restored]
>
>> > > Homer's The Iliad and The Odyssey, based on the statistical modelling
>> > > of

>> > > language evolution are found to date to 710-760 BCE

>> >
>> > >http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bies.201200165/full
>> >
>> > interesting
>> Definitely. The time frame agrees with that which previously has been
>> proposed by the majority of Homerists.
>
> Hittite was a very apt choice of starting point for the interpolation!
>
> I would note that the precision of the result is lessened not only by
> the statistical breadth of the peak in the word-age distribution, but
> also in proportion to the sum of the uncertainty in the date of Hittite
> (+/-200 years, according to fig.1A) and double that in the date of its
> latest IE ancestor in common with Greek. For each century by which the
> estimated chronological distance between Hittite and Modern Greek is
> increased or decreased, the date calculated for Homer will be about
> twenty years earlier or later respectively.

Since the precision for the dating of Homer is known to a much greater
accuracy than this prediction, ie. 880 BC and all dates later than this can
be ruled out entirely because Homer has been confused with Lesches of Lesbos
who wrote the Little Iliad or he has been assigned to the reign of the wrong
Phidon since there were probably up to 6 Phidons who ruled Argos (Phidon,
Phidon II Eratus, Phidon III Euagetus, Phidon IV Damocratidas, Phidon V and
Phidon VI father of Lacedas), and all dates before this can also be ruled
out entirely since they date Homer to the exact time of the Trojan War or
shortly after or place him at the time of the Ionian Migration because they
have confused Lycurgus who lived at the time of Homer in the reign of
Charillus king of Sparta with an earlier Lycurgus mentioned by Herodotus who
lived during the reing of Labotas/Leobotes king of Spata, the historical
date of Homer could be used to correct the dating of the Hittite and
Indo-European.

This would give a corrected date for Indo-European being 900 years earlier,
i.e. 7600 BC instead of 6700 BC. The only problem is that the statistically
analysis is fundamentally flawed. Homer is not the work of just one single
author. Even back in 1800 Friedrich August Wolf worked this out. Therefore
the date for Homer needs to be pushed back much earlier to allow for this.

On top of that the estimate is also besed on a guess for the latest possible
date for Homer which is much too late. As I said above and in my reply to
Franz Gnaedinger all dates after 880 BC safely be ruled out as mistakes by
the chronicler. Earlier dates for Homer are still possible since the 880 BC
date for Homer is actually a refrence to the 8 months Lycugus reigned in
Sparta before Charillus (883-823 BC (Diodorus, Loeb Classical Library
edition, 1939)) was born, about which time he brought the text of Homer's
poems to Sparta after Homer's death. Lycurgus died in 887 BC if we go by
Plutarch who says his death was 130 years before the Ephors were established
(757 BC), so this year can be set as the lowest possible year for Homer's
works since Lycurgus couldn't have brought them to Sparta after he was dead.
Otherwise if the Spatans are counting different winters and summers as
individual years which is a system the Spartans were known to used
(Pausanius) then Lycurgus death would date to 822 BC which is about the time
Charillus died also.

>
> --
> Odysseus

[Agamemnon]

"DKleinecke" <dklei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:12ffea62-b722-41db...@pd6g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

Chronologically it's codswallop because Greek chronology dates back over
1000 years before Homer. Writing existed in Greece since 1900 BC in the from
of Linear A, and since 1600 BC in the from of Linear B. Phoenician script
was brought to Greece by Cadmus in 1430 BC (Eusebius/Jerome) and remained in
continuous usage from that date onwards. By 1200 BC about the time of the
Trojan War the Greek variant Phoenician script had already began to split up
into at least 5 different variants of its own according to modern analyses
and was used by the majority of the populations so that by 1130 BC it had
already travel to the north of Asia Minor with the Aeolian migration and by
1050 BC it was already in the southern part of Asia Minor and on Smaos where
it was used by Homer, with the Ionian migration.

Bearing that in mind your hypothesis about Homer having fixed the text does
not make sense. It was Lycurgus who fixed the text having inherited from
Homer's posterity in around about 880 BC and spread it throughout Sparta as
the definitive version, while other versions not as definitive also existed.
See Plutrach's Lives and The Contest between Hesiod and Homer.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 10, 2:08 pm, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> "DKleinecke" <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote in message

not in Greek, however

> and since 1600 BC

that seems rather earlier than the date usually given

> in the from of Linear B. Phoenician script
> was brought to Greece by Cadmus in 1430 BC (Eusebius/Jerome)

Oh, good lord, another religious nut to put beside analyst41.

Is this the same Aggie who used to plague us years ago, or someone
else who has arrogated the name to himself?

> and remained in
> continuous usage from that date onwards.

Except that they were extremely careful never to write on any sort of
non-perishable material.

> By 1200 BC about the time of the
> Trojan War the Greek variant Phoenician script had already began to split up
> into at least 5 different variants of its own according to modern analyses

No "modern analysis" puts any Greek alphabet at that time; there is no
evidence for Phoenician script until at least 200 years later than
that.

> and was used by the majority of the populations so that by 1130 BC it had
> already travel to the north of Asia Minor with the Aeolian migration and by
> 1050 BC it was already in the southern part of Asia Minor and on Smaos where
> it was used by Homer, with the Ionian migration.

Except, again, that they chose never, _ever_, to write anything on a
non-perishable surface.

> Bearing that in mind your hypothesis about Homer having fixed the text does
> not make sense. It was Lycurgus who fixed the text having inherited from
> Homer's posterity in around about 880 BC and spread it throughout Sparta as
> the definitive version, while other versions not as definitive also existed.
> See Plutrach's Lives and The Contest between Hesiod and Homer.

You might want to consult scholarship on the nature of ancient
historiography.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yusuf: I have asked you before why you drag this CRAP into sci.lang
from (any) soc.* groups.

[Agamemnon]

"JTEM" <jte...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2284bccb-d3e5-4a60...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...

DKleinecke <dkleine...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My hypothesis about Homer is that he fixed the text because he made a
> written copy and that the Greek script was adapted from Phoenician
> while he was a youngish man. In the Iliad Homer was more of an editor
> and revisor than an original author. Then having accomplished that he
> went on to invent his own epic designed to please some family on Samos
> that considered themselves descendents of Odysseus.

<<<The Trojan War appears to be nothing more than
a retalling (repackaging) of an Egyptian campaign
of Tuthmosis III against Joffa, where he managed
to capture the city after soldiers were smuggled
inside in baskets -- sometime in the 15th century
BC (BCE).>>>

Complete and utter codswallop. The capture of Troy dates to 1183/2 BC
(Diodorus) and Greece historians name at least 4 Egyptian Pharaohs who lived
during this period. The first being Thithonus aka. Aktisanis, aka.
Ptissonius (Pah Tissonius) who was Binere-meramun Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae,
the second being Memnon, who was Seti Userkheperure Meryamun, the third
being Proteus or Kres, who was Setnakte and the fourth being his son
Rampsinitus or Theoclymenos who was Usermaatre Ramses III.

Tuthmosis/Djehutymes III appears in Greek historical text long before the
Trojan Way because he was Aegyptus who's reign in Egypt Jerome dates to 1480
BC which is the same date given by the Egyptian Low Chronology.

<<<Ironically, this fact is often dismissed as
preposterous when the claim that the very same
historical events are remembered (in a manner of
speaking) in "Ali Babba and the Forty Thieves":

http://ib205.tripod.com/djehuty.html

So events of the 15th century BC can be alive even
today within Ali Babba, but somehow it's ridiculous
to note the obvious similarities with the Trojan
Horse...

And let's not forget: The archaeology doesn't support
Homer at all. So the only alternative to a
"borrowing" of a different tale is to claim it as a
wholesale invention...>>>

More codswallop. The Archaeology not only supports Homer and the Iliad but
it also supports Herakes destruction of Troy in 1243 BC, 50 years before the
siege of Troy began.

The Troy Homer is describing is actually the one razed by Herakles and this
description also proves that Homer used earlier texts to write his poems
since it is known that his teacher was Creophylus who wrote the epic of the
life of Herakles which Homer obviously copied from, and which was also
plagiarised by Panyassis.

[Agamemnon]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:33cecac2-43d3-48d4...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

That's disputed. Since we're talking about statistical analyses here, the
one done on Linear A showed that it was an early from of Aeolic Greek.

> and since 1600 BC

<<<that seems rather earlier than the date usually given>>>

It had to be developed from Linear A at some date and this is when the
so-called Mycenaean Greeks came into the Peloponnesus.

> in the from of Linear B. Phoenician script
> was brought to Greece by Cadmus in 1430 BC (Eusebius/Jerome)

<<<Oh, good lord, another religious nut to put beside analyst41.

Is this the same Aggie who used to plague us years ago, or someone
else who has arrogated the name to himself?>>>

I didn't plague you. I enlightened you to actual historical facts.

> and remained in
> continuous usage from that date onwards.

<<<Except that they were extremely careful never to write on any sort of
non-perishable material.>>>

Why would they when the system of writing was designed to be written on
papyrus as opposed to clay tablets. No actual Phoenician script proper from
Phoenicia survives from this time either for exactly the same reasons. It's
only found in Egypt which is more evidence supporting it's Egyptian origin
as stated by the Greeks since Cadmus brought it to Greece from Egypt.

> By 1200 BC about the time of the
> Trojan War the Greek variant Phoenician script had already began to split
> up
> into at least 5 different variants of its own according to modern analyses

<<<No "modern analysis" puts any Greek alphabet at that time; there is no
evidence for Phoenician script until at least 200 years later than
that.>>>

This evidence shows that there were at least 5 Greek variants of the script
at the time and by at least 800 BC, therefore the only way these variants
could have evolved is from a common source that had spread through the whole
of Greece by at least 1200 to 1100 BC.

> and was used by the majority of the populations so that by 1130 BC it had
> already travel to the north of Asia Minor with the Aeolian migration and
> by
> 1050 BC it was already in the southern part of Asia Minor and on Smaos
> where
> it was used by Homer, with the Ionian migration.

<<<Except, again, that they chose never, _ever_, to write anything on a
non-perishable surface.>>>

See above. The script was designed to be written on papyrus.

> Bearing that in mind your hypothesis about Homer having fixed the text
> does
> not make sense. It was Lycurgus who fixed the text having inherited from
> Homer's posterity in around about 880 BC and spread it throughout Sparta
> as
> the definitive version, while other versions not as definitive also
> existed.
> See Plutrach's Lives and The Contest between Hesiod and Homer.

<<<You might want to consult scholarship on the nature of ancient
historiography.>>>

You might actually want to read some historical texts and chronologies
instead of mouthing of about something of which you know nothing about. I
took part on the online translation of the Latin text of Jerome's Chronicon
and have also translated Lynche's Travels of Noah into Europe which is based
on the same ancient chronological tables.

[Agamemnon]

"Christopher Ingham" <christop...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:66dfc2d3-b837-4a46...@n11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

On May 8, 8:56 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <ygur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 8, 6:44 am, SolomonW <Solom...@citi.com> wrote:
>
> interesting
<<<Definitely. The time frame agrees with that which previously has been
proposed by the majority of Homerists.>>>

Well of course it would because they are using the time frame proposed by
the majority of Homerists in order to extrapolate the date of Homer.

This analysis relies entirely on the dating of the spilt of Indo-European
into it's various branches which of course is base on the date of Homer

proposed by the majority of Homerists.

This statistical analysis is therefore fatally flawed.

The only thing this analysis can be used to do is not to extrapolate the
date of Homer but to extrapolate the date of the split in Indo-European
languages from the historical date of Homer which is already known to be 880
BC. All other dates can be ruled out as erroneous for the reasons I have
explained in my reply to Odysseus.

Using that information the date for the split in Indo-European needs to be
pushed back 900 years earlier, i.e. to 7600 BC instead of 6700 BC. This is
assuming the other possible flaws in this analysis have been addressed, ie.
the fact that the works of Homer were written, edited and reconstructed by
multiple authors writing at different times in history.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 10, 2:39 pm, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
> "Peter T. Daniels" <gramma...@verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:33cecac2-43d3-48d4...@i3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...

We are not talking about "statistical analyses" _here_.

What "one"?

How does a "statistical analysis" tell you that an unknown script
encodes a known language vs. a completely unknown language?

> > and since 1600 BC
>
> <<<that seems rather earlier than the date usually given>>>
>
> It had to be developed from Linear A at some date and this is when the
> so-called Mycenaean Greeks came into the Peloponnesus.

Where did you get that notion?

And if they did, why would that provide a date for devising the
script?

> > in the from of Linear B. Phoenician script
> > was brought to Greece by Cadmus in 1430 BC (Eusebius/Jerome)
>
> <<<Oh, good lord, another religious nut to put beside analyst41.
>
> Is this the same Aggie who used to plague us years ago, or someone
> else who has arrogated the name to himself?>>>
>
> I didn't plague you. I enlightened you to actual historical facts.

One doesn't go to Eusebius and Jerome for "historical facts" about
things they could not possibly have known anything about. One goes to
them for Early Christian interpretations of recent events.

> > and remained in
> > continuous usage from that date onwards.
>
> <<<Except that they were extremely careful never to write on any sort of
> non-perishable material.>>>
>
> Why would they when the system of writing was designed to be written on
> papyrus as opposed to clay tablets.

Because EVERYONE loved to write on their walls and their pottery when
they had the opportunity.

Do you even know what the earliest attested Greek
"inscriptions" (actually, graffiti on vases) consist of?

> No actual Phoenician script proper from
> Phoenicia survives from this time either for exactly the same reasons. It's
> only found in Egypt which is more evidence supporting it's Egyptian origin
> as stated by the Greeks since Cadmus brought it to Greece from Egypt.

No Phoenician script comes from Egypt or anywhere else from the date
you need for supporting your fantasy.

> > By 1200 BC about the time of the
> > Trojan War the Greek variant Phoenician script had already began to split
> > up
> > into at least 5 different variants of its own according to modern analyses
>
> <<<No "modern analysis" puts any Greek alphabet at that time; there is no
> evidence for Phoenician script until at least 200 years later than
> that.>>>
>
> This evidence shows that there were at least 5 Greek variants of the script
> at the time and by at least 800 BC, therefore the only way these variants
> could have evolved is from a common source that had spread through the whole
> of Greece by at least 1200 to 1100 BC.

There is NO EVIDENCE for Greek script, let alone for 5 variants, "by
800 BC."

Your idea of how long it takes for a script variant to arise is
bizarre. Once a homeland city-state sent out a colony, it had very
little contact with it, and their alphabets began to diverge within a
decade or so.

> > and was used by the majority of the populations so that by 1130 BC it had
> > already travel to the north of Asia Minor with the Aeolian migration and
> > by
> > 1050 BC it was already in the southern part of Asia Minor and on Smaos
> > where
> > it was used by Homer, with the Ionian migration.
>
> <<<Except, again, that they chose never, _ever_, to write anything on a
> non-perishable surface.>>>
>
> See above. The script was designed to be written on papyrus.

Are you unaware of the thousands of Greek inscriptions incised in
stone?

And the I-don't-know-how-many either painted on or incised in pottery?

> > Bearing that in mind your hypothesis about Homer having fixed the text
> > does
> > not make sense. It was Lycurgus who fixed the text having inherited from
> > Homer's posterity in around about 880 BC and spread it throughout Sparta
> > as
> > the definitive version, while other versions not as definitive also
> > existed.
> > See Plutrach's Lives and The Contest between Hesiod and Homer.
>
> <<<You might want to consult scholarship on the nature of ancient
> historiography.>>>
>
> You might actually want to read some historical texts and chronologies
> instead of mouthing of about something of which you know nothing about. I
> took part on the online translation of the Latin text of Jerome's Chronicon
> and have also translated Lynche's Travels of Noah into Europe which is based
> on the same ancient chronological tables.

The fact that you translated them doesn't make them historically
reliable.

[Agamemnon]

"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@verizon.net> wrote in message

news:3418079b-3afd-4fb8...@q8g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...

This one http://www.anistor.gr/english/enback/v014.htm by Tsikritsis

<<<How does a "statistical analysis" tell you that an unknown script
encodes a known language vs. a completely unknown language?>>>

Read the article and find out.

> > and since 1600 BC
>
> <<<that seems rather earlier than the date usually given>>>
>
> It had to be developed from Linear A at some date and this is when the
> so-called Mycenaean Greeks came into the Peloponnesus.

<<<Where did you get that notion?

And if they did, why would that provide a date for devising the
script?>>>

The archaeological evidence shows that Linear B was already developed and
was being used for writing by 1500 BC, therefore it's development must have
began in 1600 BC.

> > in the from of Linear B. Phoenician script
> > was brought to Greece by Cadmus in 1430 BC (Eusebius/Jerome)
>
> <<<Oh, good lord, another religious nut to put beside analyst41.
>
> Is this the same Aggie who used to plague us years ago, or someone
> else who has arrogated the name to himself?>>>
>
> I didn't plague you. I enlightened you to actual historical facts.

<<<One doesn't go to Eusebius and Jerome for "historical facts" about
things they could not possibly have known anything about. One goes to
them for Early Christian interpretations of recent events.>>>

That's like saying one doesn't go to a modern day historian for historical

facts about things they could not possibly have known anything about. One

goes to them for 21st Century interpretations of recent events.

You sound like a fool.

> > and remained in
> > continuous usage from that date onwards.
>
> <<<Except that they were extremely careful never to write on any sort of
> non-perishable material.>>>
>
> Why would they when the system of writing was designed to be written on
> papyrus as opposed to clay tablets.

<<<Because EVERYONE loved to write on their walls and their pottery when
they had the opportunity.>>>

That is a complete and utter load of twaddle. Scribes were not potters and
potters were not scripts. They were two completely different independent
professions. The same can be said for decorators.

<<<Do you even know what the earliest attested Greek
"inscriptions" (actually, graffiti on vases) consist of?>>>

The earliest attested Greek writing is the Phaistos script and Linear A.

> No actual Phoenician script proper from
> Phoenicia survives from this time either for exactly the same reasons.
> It's
> only found in Egypt which is more evidence supporting it's Egyptian origin
> as stated by the Greeks since Cadmus brought it to Greece from Egypt.

<<<No Phoenician script comes from Egypt or anywhere else from the date
you need for supporting your fantasy.>>>

More evidence proving that you don't have a clue of what you are talking
about. The Phoenician script derives directly from Proto Siniatic which was
developed in Egypt and did not reach Phoenicia until about 1450 BC. These
archaeological facts fully corroborate the Greek accounts which also place
the development of Phoenician script in Egypt and it's arrival in Greece and
Phoenicia at the time of Cadmus and his brother Phoenix who went to
Phoenicia in 1454 BC according to the standard chronology.

> > By 1200 BC about the time of the
> > Trojan War the Greek variant Phoenician script had already began to
> > split
> > up
> > into at least 5 different variants of its own according to modern
> > analyses
>
> <<<No "modern analysis" puts any Greek alphabet at that time; there is no
> evidence for Phoenician script until at least 200 years later than
> that.>>>
>
> This evidence shows that there were at least 5 Greek variants of the
> script
> at the time and by at least 800 BC, therefore the only way these variants
> could have evolved is from a common source that had spread through the
> whole
> of Greece by at least 1200 to 1100 BC.

<<<There is NO EVIDENCE for Greek script, let alone for 5 variants, "by
800 BC.">>>

WRONG!

You don't have the remotest clue of what you are talking about.

<<<Your idea of how long it takes for a script variant to arise is
bizarre. Once a homeland city-state sent out a colony, it had very
little contact with it, and their alphabets began to diverge within a
decade or so.>>>

The Greek and Trojan (ie. proto-Roman) migrations to Italy took place
immediately after the capture of Troy and the Aeolian migration which
followed took place in 1130 BC and the Ionian in 1050 BC therefore the
Phoenician script must have gone with them at the same time and was being
used throughout Greece by 1181 BC at the latest, in order to explain the
similarities let alone the divergences.

The fact that at least 5 different Phoenicians Greek script variants existed
by 800 BC proves that the divergence in the script occurred around 1200 BC.

> > and was used by the majority of the populations so that by 1130 BC it
> > had
> > already travel to the north of Asia Minor with the Aeolian migration and
> > by
> > 1050 BC it was already in the southern part of Asia Minor and on Smaos
> > where
> > it was used by Homer, with the Ionian migration.
>
> <<<Except, again, that they chose never, _ever_, to write anything on a
> non-perishable surface.>>>
>
> See above. The script was designed to be written on papyrus.

<<<Are you unaware of the thousands of Greek inscriptions incised in
stone?>>>

The Greeks did not learn stone cutting skills until 650 BC.

<<<And the I-don't-know-how-many either painted on or incised in pottery?>>>

Potters were not scribes and scribes were not potters. They were two
completly different professions.

What this evidence clearly shows is that if inscriptions on pottery existed
by 800 or even 600 BC then the Phoenician script must have stopped being the
preserve of scribes alone by this time and virtually everyone by then could
read and write. Now how long do you think it would have taken for an
education system to have been established throughout Greece and it's
colonies to do this? The script must have bee in general use centuries
before the ordinary citizens especially colonists could have learned to read
and write and this could have only happened is if the script was already in
general use by scribes throughout the Greek world by 1200 BC and the script
travelled to each colony with the migrants who founded the colonies in the
first place.

> > Bearing that in mind your hypothesis about Homer having fixed the text
> > does
> > not make sense. It was Lycurgus who fixed the text having inherited from
> > Homer's posterity in around about 880 BC and spread it throughout Sparta
> > as
> > the definitive version, while other versions not as definitive also
> > existed.
> > See Plutrach's Lives and The Contest between Hesiod and Homer.
>
> <<<You might want to consult scholarship on the nature of ancient
> historiography.>>>
>
> You might actually want to read some historical texts and chronologies
> instead of mouthing of about something of which you know nothing about. I
> took part on the online translation of the Latin text of Jerome's
> Chronicon
> and have also translated Lynche's Travels of Noah into Europe which is
> based
> on the same ancient chronological tables.

<<<The fact that you translated them doesn't make them historically
reliable.>>>

The fact that they are corroborated by the Egyptian Low Chronology and
datable geological and astronomical events does.

[JTEM]

"Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:


> Complete and utter codswallop. The capture of Troy dates to 1183/2 BC
> (Diodorus) and Greece historians name at least 4 Egyptian Pharaohs who lived
> during this period. The first being Thithonus aka. Aktisanis, aka.
> Ptissonius (Pah Tissonius) who was Binere-meramun Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae,
> the second being Memnon, who was Seti Userkheperure Meryamun, the third
> being Proteus or Kres, who was Setnakte and the fourth being his son
> Rampsinitus or Theoclymenos who was Usermaatre Ramses III.

So you're arguing that the Greeks had the means
and opportunity to appropriate the story from
Egypt...

> Tuthmosis/Djehutymes III appears in Greek historical text long before the
> Trojan Way because he was Aegyptus who's reign in Egypt Jerome dates to 1480
> BC which is the same date given by the Egyptian Low Chronology.

Again, you're arguing that they had the means
and opportunity to do it.

So, there story isn't just similar, they also were
exposed to the Joffa campaign stories...

When you sue someone for plagiarism you have to
prove both similarity to an existing work and
access/exposure to it -- the more similar the less
access you need to prove, the more access the less
similarity is necessary.

I pointed out the obvious similarity and here you
are arguing (fiercely) that they had good access.

Case closed.


-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com

[Yusuf B Gursey]

I don't know much about Homer so I do not know if it is crap or not.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

On May 10, 12:28 pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:

>
> About what you'd expect, I guess, when you feed a bunch of poetry into
> a program that's expecting nucleotides. Was this one of the
> universities established by the drug cartels for the benefit of brain-
> damaged researchers?
>

Ricardo Mansilla's fine work that has nothing whatsoever
to do with drugs goes along with a similar investigation
of Chaucer by a German scholar who applied a DNA
taxonomy program. Result: the oldest versions are the
dry ones while the juicy ones are the most recent versions.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

On May 10, 6:57 pm, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
> (...)

>
> As you said above the Iliad and Odyssey are the works of multiple authors.
> They were originally written long before Homer was even born and Homer
> simply reworked them and later poets reworked them further still. The
> original version of the Odyssey is attributed to Telemachus and the Iliad is
> said to have been originally composed immediately after the capture of Troy.
> These texts were originally purely historical and some poet or other decided
> to insert the gods into them and then Homer got hold of them and
> mythologized them further still.

I rely on the hermeneutic approach, trying to understand
a work from within. For example Polyphem was the Homeric
symbol of Troy, rather resembling a wooded hill than a man
who eats bread, his one eye the acropolis of Troy overlooking
the wide river plain, his body downtown Troy VIIa providing
protected shelter for five to ten thousand people, his cave
the harbor on the Besik Bay, his sheep and goats foreign
ships waiting for favorable winds, the milk he gets from them
tolls and fees the Troyans asked, especially for shiploads
of the precious tin required for casting bronze. Mycenaean
bronze contained twelve or even fifteen percent of tin (modern
bronze five percent), but there is no tin in Greece, their tin
came from Central Asia, and perhaps also from the Ore
Mountains in Central Europe, in either case bound to pass
Troy where the Trojans laid hands on the precious cargo,
abducting Helen, as it were, Helen the Homeric symbol of tin
(as I explained many times). Odysseus, a well-experienced
sailor, could have returned from Troy in ten days, instead
he needed ten years. His adventures are dreams. He arrived
home, sleeps on the shore, and dreams. In his dreams he
leaves Troy and reaches strange places - Troy in disguise
and blended with other places and periods of time. Finally
he reaches pleasant Scherie - identified as an early Troy by
Eberhard Zangger -, realizes where he is, and what a lovely
place he destroyed - or will destroy in the time perspective
of the Phaeakians - and can't help weeping. Now he falls
in a deep sleep - still in his dream - and returns home for
good, and sleeps a deep refreshing sleep. In the morning
he wakes up, a new task waiting for him: freeing the land
from the shameless suitors of Penelope (Peloponnese),
from those who profit from the land without meeting their
obligations. This, en bref, is the frame the second Homer
filled in with bardic material. Every adventure of Odysseus
and his compagnons is another bard's rendition of the
Trojan war, obvious in the case of the giant who appears
twice, in the story of Polyphem, and in the story of another
giant. Apparently the compiler of the Odyssey found both
versions appealing, so he began with the most important
ballad of the Trojan war symbolized in the story of Polyphem,
and let follow the other giant, again the symbol of Troy,
in a later adventure. All of those adventures tell the story
of the Trojan war from various angles, in symbolic form,
and justify the Trojan war from the perspective of the
Achaeans.

[benl...@ihug.co.nz]

Ah. I think you must be talking about the Universidad Nacional
Autonoma de México, a reputable institution -- "Free University" is a
rather misleading translation.

Still, it's not clear to me what a DNA taxonomy program would be
comparing when working on Chaucer or Homer -- different poems,
pretending that they were transformations of the same original?? Or
different "versions" -- manuscript traditions? And on what basis would
it be able to assign dates, or decide which were the oldest?? Still
sounds like mumbo-jumbo science to me.

[Peter T. Daniels]

It has nothing to do with whether it's Homer, Lao-tse, or Haroun al-
Raschid. Obvious crap is obvious crap, and nothing good has ever come
out of a soc.* group.

[Yusuf B Gursey]

all I know that is that it came from a journal.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2013-05-11 08:46:51 +0000, benl...@ihug.co.nz said:

> On May 11, 7:31�pm, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
>> On May 10, 12:28�pm, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> About what you'd expect, I guess, when you feed a bunch of poetry into
>>> a program that's expecting nucleotides. Was this one of the
>>> universities established by the drug cartels for the benefit of brain-
>>> damaged researchers?
>>
>> Ricardo Mansilla's fine work that has nothing whatsoever
>> to do with drugs goes along with a similar investigation
>> of Chaucer by a German scholar who applied a DNA
>> taxonomy program. Result: the oldest versions are the
>> dry ones while the juicy ones are the most recent versions.
>
> Ah. I think you must be talking about the Universidad Nacional

> Autonoma de M�xico, a reputable institution -- "Free University" is a
> rather misleading translation.

Almost certainly, as Ricardo Mansilla is a perfectly respectable
scholar at the UNAM (albeit one with more evident expertise in
mathematics than in biological classification or linguistics). However,
he can hardly be blamed for Franz's confused account of his work. I
imagine the paper in question is this one:

http://tinyurl.com/cg9fme7

In it, they say "There is a considerable amount of bibliography on
whether Homer actually existed, and when and where the Iliad and the
Odyssey were composed. For the purposes of the present paper, we have
deliberately set the so-called 'Homeric question' aside and have
focused, instead, on considering the two extant poems as independent
wholes."

What they used was not what I would call a "DNA taxonomy program", and,
indeed, the word "taxonomy" doesn't occur in the paper. It's more a
spectral analysis based on ideas introduced by Shannon before anyone
had any idea how information was coded in DNA.

They also don't seem to mention the "dozen or sixteen or even more
bards" that impressed Franz.

It's possible, of course, that he was reading a later paper, because
they say (immediately after what I quoted above) "In a future paper we
will discuss our result about this topic". However, if this later paper
exists it doesn't seem to be available, so I don't know where Franz
would have found it. I find it easier to think that he has a completely
confused idea of what the paper was about. For someone who is
apparently unfamiliar with the name of one of the largest universities
in the world that wouldn't be too surprising.

In any case, Franz was already saying much the same sort of thing in
sci.lang in February 2005:

"Ricardo Mansilla from the Free
University of Mexico applied a similar DNA taxonomy program
to Homer's Odyssey and found that at least a dozen authors
contributed to this epic. I sent him an e-mail and told him
that his discovery goes along with my interpretation, since
Homer's alter ego was Hermes, who was not only the messenger
of the gods but also the patron of thieves, and the bard of
the Odyssey must have been a thieve of sorts, as he compiled
ballads by other bards into his own epic. Ricardo Mansilla
sent me a kind reply."

That leaves rather a small window for the later paper to have been
available for Franz to have read and corresponded with the author about.

>
> Still, it's not clear to me what a DNA taxonomy program would be
> comparing when working on Chaucer or Homer -- different poems,
> pretending that they were transformations of the same original?? Or
> different "versions" -- manuscript traditions? And on what basis would
> it be able to assign dates, or decide which were the oldest?? Still
> sounds like mumbo-jumbo science to me.

No, I think the science is probably OK. It's just rather different from
Franz's account of it.


--
athel

[Yusuf B Gursey]

Harun al-Rashid, the Abbasid Caliph did not author anything of
literary value. he just happens to be mentioned in the 1001 Nights.

the Arabian equivalent would be `Antara (a pre-Islamic warrior-poet)
or Imru'ul-Qays (the pre-Islamic poet of Justinian's era, the Kinda
prince, not the Lakhmid king of the same name of an earlier time known
for his funerary inscription). both have a romance associated with
them. that of `Antara, a pre-Islamic warrior-poet th emore
imprtant.Sirat-ul-`Antar is the romance associated with `Antara. he is
said to be Black, from an African mother and Arab father. he is said
to embody the highest ideals of Arab chivalry (that of equestrian
warriors with a code of conduct). in the romance he is given an
incredibly long life so he has exploits extending to the Crusader era,
where he fights the Franks (i.e. the Crusaders). so he is the Arabian
equivalent of King Arthur.

the Turkish equivalent would be Dede Korkut (otherwise known as Korkut
Ata), a sage guiding Oghuz Turks against enemies in Central Asia (the
Kypchak Turks) as well as against Christians in Eastern Anatolia in a
compilation of stories known as the Book of Dede Korkut, which is in a
mixed Old Anatolian Turkish and Azeri idiom. Dede Korkut also appears
in a parallel tale the Oghuznameh which is the pseudo-history of
Turkic people centering on the Oghuz Turks (Anatolian Turks, Azeris
and Turkmens). its a hodge-podge of distorted events from the old
Steppe Empires of the Turks and that of the Saljuks. better known is
the so-called Islamic version in which the hero - king, Oghuz Khan
spreads monotheism (i.e. Tengriism reconciled with Islam) amongst the
Turks (a central Islamic belief is that every nation was sent a
prophet). an Uighur script "pagan" version is also known whose idiom
has acquired some Mongolianisms. it has a list of Turkic people and
folk etymologies of their names. the epic has the clan of the Ottomans
as the primary Turkmen clan, so it was great propoganda material for
them, and the religious motif gave them Islamic credentials as well.
it had circulation amongst the post-Mongol Turkic dyansties of Central
Asia as well, and Mongol history was grafted unto it as well. aside
from the Anatolian Turks, Azeris and Turkmens the Dede Korkut tales
are known amongst the Kazakhs as well. the tales in Book of Dede
Korkut are parables about conduct in tribal life. some orientalists
have sought influence of tales in the Odyssey through Anatolia, but
this has been refuted by people who have shown that the moral message
is very different and that the resemblances (a giant thought by some
to be inspired by Cyclops) coincidental and superficial.

[Agamemnon]

"JTEM" <jte...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:59d0c935-75bd-42d4...@gb2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...

> "Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>
>
>> Complete and utter codswallop. The capture of Troy dates to 1183/2 BC
>> (Diodorus) and Greece historians name at least 4 Egyptian Pharaohs who
>> lived
>> during this period. The first being Thithonus aka. Aktisanis, aka.
>> Ptissonius (Pah Tissonius) who was Binere-meramun Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae,
>> the second being Memnon, who was Seti Userkheperure Meryamun, the third
>> being Proteus or Kres, who was Setnakte and the fourth being his son
>> Rampsinitus or Theoclymenos who was Usermaatre Ramses III.
>
> So you're arguing that the Greeks had the means
> and opportunity to appropriate the story from
> Egypt...

We know that Herodotus had confirmation of the Iliad and Menelaus' invasion
of Egypt from the Egyptians themselves and it's obvious which Egyptian
records the account Herodotus gives came from from the inscription and mural
of Ramases III which names the Achaeans, Danaoi and Pelasgians from Cyprus
(those that came with Teucer and Agapanor) and shows Menelaus fleet being
sunk.

>
>> Tuthmosis/Djehutymes III appears in Greek historical text long before the
>> Trojan Way because he was Aegyptus who's reign in Egypt Jerome dates to
>> 1480
>> BC which is the same date given by the Egyptian Low Chronology.
>
> Again, you're arguing that they had the means
> and opportunity to do it.

Diodorus already confirms that they had the means and opportunity to do it
since he states that Themaetes' poem Phrygia was derived directly from
Egyptian records in 1200 BC. The chronology in Phrygia is based on is given
by Lynche in The Travels of Noah into Europe and matches that of the 18th
Dynasty Low Chronology counting seasons as years like the Arcadians did (see
Pliny) which allows the persons in the text to be identified as specific
pharaohs of Egypt.

Triton (Diodorus/Lynche/Phrygia) = Senakhtenre Djehuti'o = Alisphragmuthosis
(Manetho)
Hammon (Diodorus/Lynche/Phrygia) = Sekenenra Djehuti'o = Tethtoosis
(Manetho)
Kronos (Diodorus/Lynche/Phrygia) = Wadjkheperre Kamose = Cham (bible)
Busiris (Diodorus/Phrygia) = Nebpehtyre Ahmoses = Mizraim (bible) = Amasis
(Manetho)
Hercules (Diodorus/Phrygia) = Amenhotep Kawaftaw = Caphtorim (bible) =
Amenophis (Manetho)
Zeus Olympicus (Diodorus/Lynche/Phrygia) = Akheperkare Djehutymes I =
Caslohim (bible) = Picas (John Nikiu et al) = Thmosis (Manetho)
Hercules (Lynche/Phrygia) = Akheperenre Djehutymes II = Philistim (bible) =
Chebron (Manetho)
Aegyptus (Herodotus/Apollodorus et al) = Menkheperre Djehutymes III =
Mizraim (Jasher) = Faunus/Hermes (John Nikiu) = Mephres (Manetho)

The same records which were used to compile Phrygia were also used to
compile the account of Danaus and Aegyptus and the biblical account of the
decent from Noah which is actually derived from Dionysus of Syracuse's,
Colonising of Italy and was still being written in Christian times.

>
> So, there story isn't just similar, they also were
> exposed to the Joffa campaign stories...
>

Of course they were, everyone was. The history of Egypt was compiled as a
standard text read by everyone and was translated into Greek prose by the
Ionians in about 650 BC but earlier translations such as Phrygia existed
long before that but those accounts had all been poeticised and
mythologised.

> When you sue someone for plagiarism you have to
> prove both similarity to an existing work and
> access/exposure to it -- the more similar the less
> access you need to prove, the more access the less
> similarity is necessary.
>
> I pointed out the obvious similarity and here you
> are arguing (fiercely) that they had good access.

The defence for plagiarism is that you must either show that the story is
original or that it was based on another story which is not copyrighted that
the person suing you either had access to or could have had access too or
that your story and his story both show more similary to those events than
to each other.

The alleged similarity you pointed out isn't a similarity. It's 300 years
too late and relates to completely different events which were already
retold in earlier stories.

I have already shown that the account that the Trojan War bares the most
similarity to the events relating to the reigns of Binere-meramun
Merneptah-hotphi(r)mae (the basis for Tithonus), Seti Userkheperure Meryamun
(the basis for Memnon), Setnakhte (the basis for Ktes aka. Proteus), Twosret
(the basis for the second Helen since it was her tomb that Setnakte is
buried in which is mentioned in Euripides play) and Usermaatre Ramses III
(the basis for Rampsinitus/Theoclymenos who drove Menelaus and Teucer out of
Egypt).

[JTEM]

"Agamemnon" <agamem...@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:


> We know that

Speaking of things "We Know"...

We know the Trojan War never happened. We know the
story has similarities with the taking of Joffa. We
know in pretty much every circumstance outside of
Troy that people assume and appropriation... take
Noah's flood, for example.

The TroyTards are trying to impose an exception. They
want a literally true "Bible" tale complete with the
active participation of gods...

Anyone who would argue the Trojan War might as well
argue over how many angels can fit on the head of a
pin...

-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com

[Franz Gnaedinger]

On May 11, 10:46 am, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
wrote:

>
> Ah. I think you must be talking about the Universidad Nacional
> Autonoma de México, a reputable institution -- "Free University" is a
> rather misleading translation.
>
> Still, it's not clear to me what a DNA taxonomy program would be
> comparing when working on Chaucer or Homer -- different poems,
> pretending that they were transformations of the same original?? Or
> different "versions" -- manuscript traditions? And on what basis would
> it be able to assign dates, or decide which were the oldest?? Still
> sounds like mumbo-jumbo science to me.

Don't confound my mumbo-jumbo freestyle English
with cranky science. Taxonomy is a most demanding
task in evolutionary biology, and can be applied not only
to living species but also to texts that have been copied
and copied and copied and copied again, mistakes
accumulating, Jesus walking _to_ the water in written
Aramaic the same as Jesus walking _on_ the water,
the false reading taken up by the Greek translators
and expanded into the story of a miracle, etcetera.
Apparently there is a way to compare versions of texts
by the number of mutations in the same way as mutations
in the genomes of species. If you are interested in this topic,
you may contact Ricardo Mansilla via e-mail, a nice fellow.

[Peter T. Daniels]

On May 12, 5:04 am, Franz Gnaedinger <f...@bluemail.ch> wrote:
> On May 11, 10:46 am, "benli...@ihug.co.nz" <benli...@ihug.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ah. I think you must be talking about the Universidad Nacional
> > Autonoma de México, a reputable institution -- "Free University" is a
> > rather misleading translation.
>
> > Still, it's not clear to me what a DNA taxonomy program would be
> > comparing when working on Chaucer or Homer -- different poems,
> > pretending that they were transformations of the same original?? Or
> > different "versions" -- manuscript traditions? And on what basis would
> > it be able to assign dates, or decide which were the oldest?? Still
> > sounds like mumbo-jumbo science to me.
>
> Don't confound my mumbo-jumbo freestyle English
> with cranky science. Taxonomy is a most demanding
> task in evolutionary biology, and can be applied not only
> to living species but also to texts that have been copied
> and copied and copied and copied again, mistakes
> accumulating, Jesus walking _to_ the water in written
> Aramaic the same as Jesus walking _on_ the water,

Who told you that nonsense? Maybe it was someone who can't tell the
difference between ܥܠ and ܠ.

[Franz Gnaedinger]

On May 12, 9:59 am, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Speaking of things "We Know"...
>
> We know the Trojan War never happened.  We know the
> story has similarities with the taking of Joffa.  We
> know in pretty much every circumstance outside of
> Troy that people assume and appropriation... take
> Noah's flood, for example.
>
> The TroyTards are trying to impose an exception.  They
> want a literally true "Bible" tale complete with the
> active participation of gods...
>
> Anyone who would argue the Trojan War might as well
> argue over how many angels can fit on the head of a
> pin...

My hermeneutic reading of Homer and the Bible raises
the plausibility of a long series of conflicts in the east,
condensed to a war in the epics.

Polyphem -- Troy, his one eye the acropolis overlooking
the river plain, his body downtown Troy VIIa providing

protected shelter for five to ten thousand people,

vulnerable after the Hittite empire collapsed
his cave -- Trojan harbor in the Besik bay
his goats and sheep -- foreign ships waiting in
the harbor for favorable wind, asked for high fees
and tributes, tolls on their cargo
horses -- ships of the early Trojans (Phaeakians),
and of the Achaeans who avoided the harbor in the
Besik bay and instead maintained an improvised
harbor in the mouthing area of the Trojan rivers
near the mosquito infested swamps (malaria episode)
Helen and her extended family -- tin, copper, bronze,
andrasit and brass; Mycenaean bronze containing
twelve or even fifteen per cent of tin, no tin in Greece,
tin came from Central Asia, bound to pass the Hellespont

where the Trojans laid hands on the precious cargo,
abducting Helen, as it were

Trojan horse -- a beautiful and apparently abandoned
Achaean ship dragged into the Besik harbor by Trojan
sailors, Achaean soldiers hide within, leave the ship
in the dark of the night, overcome the Trojan guards,
acropolis alarmed via a chain of signals, Trojan troops
hasting to the Besik bay, meanwhile Achaean troops
storm the acropolis of Troy, probably in the summer
of 1184 BC, blinding Polyphem, the one eye of the
Much Famous cyclops who resembles more a wooded
hilltop than a man who eats bread (Homer)
oxen of Helios -- freight ships on the Black Sea
transgression of Odysseus' men -- a raid on the Krimean
fleet, prolonging the series of conflicts in the east
travels to strange places -- Odysseus dreaming, reaching

Troy in disguise and blended with other places and periods

of time (Homer anticipating Freud's dream logic)
pleasant Scherie -- early Troy, when the Phaeakians were
able pilots of foreign ships and helped sailors in the
dangerous waters (Eberhard Zangger), Odysseus
recognizes where he is, what a lovely place he destroyed,
or will destroy in the time perspective of the Phaeakians,
and can't help weeping, then arrives home for good
(Zangger) where another task awaits him
Penelope -- Peloponnese
her shameless suitors -- those who profit from the land
without meeting their obligations
Athene -- course of history personified
Telemachos -- Far-away-war, far away from the Trojan
war in time, Messenin wars, Homer of the Iliad living
in the time of the first Messenian war, Homer of the
Odyssey in the time of the second Messenian war,
both compiling rich bardic material, both fearing for
the unitiy of Greece
Plagues befalling Egypt in the Bible -- symbolize the
invasion of the Sea Peoples and thus testify to turmoils
in the time of the Trojan war.