Critical Study on Chronology of the Ancient World

Discuss the world of the Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, and Egyptians.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 814
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: How Russia treats archaeological treasures of the Ancient World

Post by billd89 »

Theft, looting: probably melted down for the Au content.

Animals.

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-cultura ... 73111.html
crystallize
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu May 05, 2022 10:35 am

Re: Critical Study on Chronology of the Ancient World

Post by crystallize »

Hey, thanks for the review! :)
DCHindley wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:32 am I finally gave this 300+ page "chapter" a quick read-over.

I would quibble that the English translation of the title. "Critical Study on Chronology of the Ancient World" makes it seem like we will be dealing with yet another fanciful recalibration of ancient dating (Bronze age an later).
Yeah, that 60Kb 1st paragraph of the first chapter is probably among 5 largest paragraphs of the whole study.

What kind of title would be more appropriate? I have little idea, I've learn that my naming conventions can sound funny for a western reader.
DCHindley wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:32 am On the essay itself, there is a lot of "loaded" language which is not a good thing to see in a serious work, but the style (at least in your English translation) is colloquial and confident. I will have to invest some reading time to it.
Postnikov's writing style - quite frequently(this!) - doesn't (naturally) flow - and - (sometimes) you have to transpose it; on the fly: an interruptive writing style.
If you just read it, it's like a detective or a newspaper writing and it flows well, but in translation all these issues come up. So I was torn between easy to read and faithful text. I keep telling myself that this is race to the bottom and I better suit the text for broader audience but it's hard to actually be decisive to go this way.
DCHindley wrote: Sun Oct 02, 2022 8:32 am As you may know, the subject of Tacitus has come up here in the not too distant past. The legendary member "spin" was interested in it as it related to whether these mss had originally spelled "Christus" as "Chrestus." However, I think he supported it authenticity, although the problems with the mss tradition were brought up by some posters.

My experience, entirely as an native English speaker with limited Latin exposure and no formal academic training on the subject, was that there were differences between the narrative in the Histories and the Annals. The passages that mention "christians" or "chrestus" in Tacitus & Suetonius, did not jive very well. It doesn't help that the almost universal opinion of modern critics is that these just HAVE to be references to Jesus Christ or to "Christians" (his followers) of the time, as if there can be no other explanation worth mentioning.

In the past I've suggested interpretations of these passages that do not always assume that they refer to "Christ" or to "Christians" (capital C), but instead to Jewish "messianists," their Jewish or gentile followers in general, and that "chreston" referred to, well, an actual substance "chreston," which was made of ground chicory seeds and was believed to help serious magicians get the elemental spirits to comply with their instructions. Flies to honey. Yes there is classical and archeological support for this. I supposed that political or religious agitators might think that it would also work on crowds as well.
No, I didn't know that.
Why would the name of this magical grain coincide with the Christ's name anyway?
crystallize
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu May 05, 2022 10:35 am

Re: Critical Study on Chronology of the Ancient World

Post by crystallize »

Anyone wants to say anything about Chapter 2?
Post Reply