It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Ancient history is a good place to start. Have you noticed how about 300 years ago or thereabouts, all our ancient history texts were basically ruled unreliable because they mentioned "supernatural" events?
All religious texts, (many of which were historical texts that were simply labelled "religious"), except the hieroglyphs from ancient Egypt, were said to be falsehoods.
Using the hieroglyphs, they attempted to set a timeline for ancient history, but ignored everything else. That was a big mistake.
Few historians are aware of the real origin of their discipline. They generally take for granted as true the principles already laid down for them by preceding historians. Yet one of the basic rules of any scientific study is never to take anything for granted. Let us pull back the curtain on the study of history and view a plot that has eluded even the historians' keen eyes.
History as a scientific discipline may be said to have taken its rise with Lorenzo della Valla. He demonstrated that the "Donation of Constantine", on which the secular claims of the Roman Catholic Church were originally based, was a medieval forgery.
Forgery. That word became a touchstone. Soon non-catholic scholars everywhere became critical, negative, looking for spurious documents. The Middle Ages provided many rich finds.
During the same period a great revival in Classical Learning had been occurring, The popes had encouraged Catholic scholars of the Renaissance to revive the study of ancient Roman and Greek literature. In non-Catholic educational circles Classical Learning became associated with Catholicism. The inevitable occurred. Scholars who resented everything the word AUTHORITY stood for saw in the Greek and Roman Classics the symbolism of authority and tradition. Tradition would not be purged out, they reasoned, unless the Classics were also attacked and labeled as spurious.
The frontal assault began. At the close of the eighteenth century Friedrich August Wolf challenged the scholarly world with his "Prolegomena ad Homerum" (1795). The ancient Greek poet Homer -- famous for having composed the two great epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey -- did not compose either epic in its present form, charged Wolf. Homer, he reasoned, did not know how to write. The epics, he concluded, were pieced together about the seventh century from oral traditions, long after Homer lived. They were therefore unauthentic, Wolf concluded.
The floodgates of criticism were now opened wide. Thousands of youths, flocking to the German universities for their doctorates, were assigned the task of criticising classical literature. At the height of the epidemic, scarcely a single ancient work remained unimpugned as biased, untrue to fact, or unauthentic. Into the swirl of condemned poems, dramas, myths were heaved the sober histories of Herodotus, and Thucydides, the annals of the Greek city states, the Greek records of ancient Egypt, Assyria and Media. All ancient Greek and Roman history was condemned as spurious, unauthentic, fabulous, unhistorical -- because writing, said the critics, had not been known. How could the Greeks have preserved authentic histories reaching back 2000 years before the time of Christ, asked the critics, if the Greeks did not even know how to write till the seventh century before our era?
The historians of that day were greatly influenced by the subjective reasoning of the German Higher Critics. They accepted their verdict. Greek records prior to the seventh century disappeared from history books, or were labeled in footnotes as fabulous, or, at best, garbled.
Nearly a half century elapsed. During that period a new science arose -- archaeology. The past was being dug up. What did the excavators discover? Writing materials and documents dating more than 2000 years before the time of Christ! And in the Greek world, too!
The Greeks did know how to write after all. The critics, including Wolf, had been wrong. The imagined illiteracy of the early Greeks was a myth. The argument that they could not have preserved their history correctly was false.
But did the new evidence make any difference to the critics or to the historians? Were they willing to reconsider their conclusions? How were the historians going to explain that the basis for rejecting Greek history had been exploded?
No answers came forth. The new evidence was greeted with silence. All who brought up the problem were ridiculed as unscientific. Decades have passed, but not once has the evidence been reconsidered. The plot to suppress the truth had succeeded till now.
But the story does not end here.
Originally posted by Cale, Logan
Excellent topic as far as I've read (1st 25 pages), and I too love the tv show. Undo, I'm sorry if this was mentioned sometime after page 25, but has the topic of "the fiery furnace" from the book of Daniel, been brought up yet? 3 men go in, but 4 come out. Sounds kinda like a stargate to me.
Do you belive that Lord of the Rings was real? Or Conan the Cymmerian? Star Wars maybe? Or any other sf or fantasy book? Do you belive that every story, book or legend is real?
Do you understand difference between myth and history?
Do you know that those beliefs (history as you prefer to call it) were developing with time? And that we know how they developed? First egyptian myths (history as you prefer to call it) were about god that masturbated and thats how world was created... It changed later...
Do you know that these cultures had written history of rulers, wars and more things beside of mythology?
Do you know that archeologists and historians have now knowledge about Sumerians so big that they can trace from where they come and what happened to them?
When someone tells you that he is "Son of God" and you must obey him you belive him without questions? It happens often in all kinds of cults and churches, why you think that it couldnt happen there?
Is this thread some sort of viral marketing for Stargate series? (if yes, u2u me, i can give you a job when it ends, you are pretty good at that... )
Originally posted by shigawire
Now when we have amount of knowledge given to us even when we are kids that is far beyond knowledge that 99% peoples had in ancient times.
In first stargate movie (i really like that one) are mistakes so big that only American archeologists could do...
They had myths AND history, its not the same.
In these times even lighting was connected to gods.
Originally posted by DREAMING MAN
Zorgon & Undo, I have an interesting proposal for you. If you wan't to check into Saddam Hussein's dedication to the ancient past, do yourself a favor and look into Google.
Originally posted by shigawire
maybe it was discovered but now is in some box deep under thousands of other artifacts, waiting to be rediscovered by some student that was send to clean warehouse...
Originally posted by zorgon
That would be at the Smithsonian... that big warehouse they showed in Indiana Jones
I say we gather a team and storm the warehouse These guys are getting tax dollars... so its OURS Let's go take it back
[edit on 6-10-2007 by zorgon]
Originally posted by shigawire
You call it "German Higher Criticism" but think about those peoples that were burned or killed in other ways in name of religion taken too seriously... RELIGION! Look how many beliefs there are... Read some anthropology books that explain how these beliefs were created...