It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sacred Cave of Rome's Founders Discovered, Archaeologists Say

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 08:48 AM
link   
This whole community seems to be in a downward spiral of insults and self gratifying one upmanship and it seems to be getting caused by a small minority - with a few regularly occuring names....

Finding people throwing insults around is about as predictable as night following day on these forums lately, the topic its self is interesting, but now the thread has an atmosphere that just gets on peoples nerves and serves absolutely no positive purpose at all.

Marduk, is it really that hard to combine your intelligence with a little humility and politeness.

Apologies for no thread contribution.




posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quackmaster
This whole community seems to be in a downward spiral of insults and self gratifying one upmanship and it seems to be getting caused by a small minority - with a few regularly occuring names....

Finding people throwing insults around is about as predictable as night following day on these forums lately, the topic its self is interesting, but now the thread has an atmosphere that just gets on peoples nerves and serves absolutely no positive purpose at all.

Marduk, is it really that hard to combine your intelligence with a little humility and politeness.

Apologies for no thread contribution.


Yes but you are also being hypocritical in saying what you just said too- i don't mind other people bitching as long as it doesn't get out of hand, and more importantly, they actually have something to say on the threads subject in general. Besides, all this debate is an educational experience at least for me since i do not know a great deal on roman gods/deities etc.

"Ahem".

Does anyone know of any links featuring anymore pictures of the site? Although we know the location, it would be interesting to see how it fits into the big picture of that particular area of Rome.
Do wolves play much of a role in roman culture apart from the legend of Romulus and Remus? I find it unusual that they choose such an animal to play a part in such an important legend.






[edit on 31-1-2007 by Tokis Phoenix]



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tokis Phoenix
Does anyone know of any links featuring anymore pictures of the site? Although we know the location, it would be interesting to see how it fits into the big picture of that particular area of Rome.


I'm not sure how instructive it would be, since Rome has vastly outgrown the borders of the original city (and even the city of the Roman emperors... current Rome is more than 10 times bigger than the city that ruled Imperial Rome.

In any case, the cave is beneath the palace of Augustus on Palatine Hill... the metaphoric center of the city of Rome for the Roman Empire. This was where all the important buildings were. As you can see from this Wikipedia article, there's a lot of things that link the cave and the founding of Rome to the Palatine Hill:
en.wikipedia.org...


Do wolves play much of a role in roman culture apart from the legend of Romulus and Remus? I find it unusual that they choose such an animal to play a part in such an important legend.

Not really. Wolves were an important city predator -- they had hills where unwanted or handcapped infants (and sometimes older children or adults) were "exposed" (left to die) and where wolves provided a relatively merciful death for the abandoned ones. Wolves also appear in Aesop's fables in a minor way (usually as clever, somewhat savage, and somewhat greedy creatures). There's not many instances of wolf art outside statues to Romulus and Remus.

There's a diety, Lupercius, who was invoked to protect sheep flocks from wolves. His wife was Luperca/Lupa and is also invoked to protect sheep from wolves, as well as to help pregnant women.
www.glasstemple.com...

"Lupa" (female wolf) was also the term for prostitutes (an interesting choice, since female wolves aren't terribly promiscuous.)



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by masquaI'm very interested in the use of such caves by the ancients. It has a connection to Goddess worship and the Creation which fascinates me.

In this case, the cave seems to be the central piece around which the city was formed. Palatine Hill is the oldest section of the city of Rome, and it makes sense that it ties in with tales of the founders of the cty and the founding of the city.

Digging there, would be like digging carefully though the (multiple) cities of Troy. You find one layer rests on top of an older layer and so forth and so forth on down through history. The cave and its area would be getting pretty close to the first city level... though there was undoubtedly other older villages in the same place, and perhaps even paleolithic sites.

Humans found cities and towns (or even settlements and hunting camps) in areas that have good water and a good food supply. Our cities often hide traces of much older things.


(and I really don't want to hear that those ancient Goddesses were Nimrod, either.)




posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
If they did, that would certainly suggest that the cave was recognized as sacred before Augustus was around.

I believe that this is the case...that it (and the area) was considered sacred before the tme of Augustus. Remember, this is Palatine Hill, from where Rome was ruled (and the original center of Rome.) From a political-and-social-power standpoint, it makes sense that the ones who ruled also controlled the most sacred site (site of the founding of the city.)

But... I can't find my source, here, and I'm off to go take care of some errands.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

I have, but my knowledge and research comes from archaeological texts and not from a Biblical basis. Hence my restatement that Nimrod is only a Babylonian king and not associated with every single prominent male deity on the globe. There is no worship center dedicated to Nimrod and there are no prayers to a god named "Nimrod" -- hence, he was never viewed as a deity in any culture.


He became the sun god at his death as did Semiramis become the moon god at her death. She of course is Venus, Ishtar, Isis, Rhea, Aphrodite, Astarte, Cybele, Diana etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

You shouldn't need any Bibical knowledge to be able to connect these different goddesses through different cultures.

I understand the problem some of you have connecting the obvious. It puts a real diety in the equation.



posted on Jan, 31 2007 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sun Matrix
He became the sun god at his death as did Semiramis become the moon god at her death. She of course is Venus, Ishtar, Isis, Rhea, Aphrodite, Astarte, Cybele, Diana etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.


You sound as though you're not familiar with the history of the gods. Semiramis wasn't a moon goddess and Hathor is MUCH older than she is, historically. And the poems and plays and stories about them show that they're different goddesses. You've listed some that were in two different cultures with different philosophies that lived at the same time.

The Nimrod connection is weaker. The Nimrod reference isn't as old as Horus (although I think I read somewhere that the North American god of thunder, Tlaloc, is one of the oldest gods. I think that puts him about 2,000 years or more before Horus, who is about 1500 years older than any reference to Nimrod.

And, to bring it back to the subject of the caves and gods of woodlands, Diana was the goddess of the hunt. There wasn't any male god of the hunt in either Roman or Greek myth. It was Diana/Artemis.



posted on Feb, 1 2007 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indellkoffer

You sound as though you're not familiar with the history of the gods.

Oh, I'm familiar with the bread crumb that's laid out to find. I also stepped off that path and took a look around.




Semiramis wasn't a moon goddess and Hathor is MUCH older than she is, historically. And the poems and plays and stories about them show that they're different goddesses. You've listed some that were in two different cultures with different philosophies that lived at the same time.


I'm sure you know that Hathor is Isis and her timeline is the 5th dynasty. (The Eqyptian timeline is questionable). Semiramis lived at the time of the tower of Babel. Semiramis timeline is also confused by those trying to identify her as Shammuramat of Babylon which is incorrect.



The Nimrod connection is weaker. The Nimrod reference isn't as old as Horus


The story of Nimrod being cut up is the same as Osiris. They find all the pieces except the phallus. Nimrod marries his mother Semiramis. Osiris marries his sister Isis. They have a child Horus. Semiramis has Tammuz.
It's the same story. There are so many different names for the gods because of the language confusion at Babel.



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tokis Phoenix
I find it unusual that they choose such an animal to play a part in such an important legend.

Well, once it makes it into the foundation legend, its going to assume a position of importance. Its possible that the wolf was a totem of tribe from that area. It might be important to them because there used to be lots of wolves throughout europe too. THe wolf is also an odd animal, in that its pretty much like a dog, except its completely wild, there aren't many animals that are like our domesticated versions and are so different. So the wolf might especially represent to men that 'primitive and wild' aspect that is out there in the world.

This in itself brings up many possible interpretations of the myth, if romulus and remus were suckled by a wolf-bitch, then that means that they are sort of wild men, in a sense they are the original men, especially befitting of the founders. It also reminds me of how Enkidu was created as a wild man, covered in hair, and living amoung the animals, as an animal.

Interesting, come to think of it, given that enkidu is 'civilized' by having sex with a ritual temple prostitute of the local goddess, and that romulus and remus were born to a woman who was raped by a god while she was a vestal virgin (not quite the same clearly). Also, remus and romulus are twins, and Enkidu and Gilgamesh are paired as equals or twins. Odd that.


Byrd
that it (and the area) was considered sacred before the tme of Augustus

Yes, but what I mean is, what if augustus said, ahah, no one knows where the lupercal actually is, if I make a cave in my residence and call it the lupercal, people will say 'augustus, he is like the new romulus'.

[edit on 2-2-2007 by Nygdan]



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 01:08 AM
link   


So the wolf might especially represent to men that 'primitive and wild' aspect that is out there in the world.

In Sumer its actually the other way round
Wolves appear very frequently in Mesopotamian mythology
the stories are all the same and have a common theme
it goes like this
1) a wolf eat all the lambs
2) a shepherd prays to a God and sets a trap for the wolf
3) because the farmer has payed tribute to a God the trap is succesful and the wolf is caught
4) the wolf prays to the god
5) the god agress to let the wolf go as long as it will not eat any more lambs and instead will aid the shepherd
6) the wolf becomes a dog
etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...
so the connection with Rome is the same
By suckling Romulus and Remus the wolf is aiding mankind and becomes a dog

you know what dogs are to man don't you


Sun Matrix
Nimrod is not every male deity that ever existed (though he might be jesus)
because he is in fact not a deity
hes just a man and a fictional one at that who appears in the religious text of a race that you are not a member of.

I am still waiting for you to produce any evidence at all for your claims
this forum as you already know is not for your imagination
if you can't back what you are saying with credible links then please don't bother saying it
because no one is interested
ok


[edit on 2-2-2007 by Marduk]



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Marduk, its great that you can contribue to the conversation, but name calling and abusing other members isn't making a good contribution. You've really got to take it easy on other members, just because you don't think that a person is well versed in the history or archaeology, doesn't mean that you should be, of all things, calling them names in order to attack them. Argument is one thing, but this is abuse.



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 09:58 AM
link   


Also, remus and romulus are twins, and Enkidu and Gilgamesh are paired as equals or twins. Odd that.


Just different versions of the same story with additional twists and turns as is continually proved. I keep waiting for the light to go on.



posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Well, I don't think that it needs to be a story that started in one place, say mesopotamia, and then spread outwards from there, taking on local character in each location. Rather, I think that the idea of 'twin heroes' is just an appealing idea to people in general, so when people are making up stories, once that one pops up, its going to be popular. Whether its Enkidu and Gilgamesh, Castor and Pollux, Romulus and Remus, or the Wonder Twins (what other possible explanation can there be for the existence of the wonder twins, which were so lame!)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join