| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - History or Myth?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


History or Myth?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: History or Myth?
    Posted: 20 Oct 2019 at 14:02
We've all heard the old story demonstrating gaps in communication, for example WW1 trenches a message passed by word of mouth started as "We're going to advance, send reinforcements", but ended up as "We're going to a dance, send three and fourpence(35cents)".

The Bible says that David slew a giant, Goliath, but in those days any man who was six feet or more in height would have stood out in a crowd, so how tall was Goliath?

Joshua, at the Battle of Jericho, had his trumpeters march around the city wall, blowing their trumpets until the walls collapsed.

We could just about tear up the entire Old Testament as having been disproved by modern science, the same for a great deal of the New Testament.

My point is that over time, when tales are told from mouth to mouth, there is a great possibility for exaggeration, misinterpretation and downright lies.

Take some more modern examples;
  • He killed himself a bear when he was only three;
  • Sean South (Irish Nationalist killed in 1958 while attacking a British post) from Garryowen- he wasn't, he was a Dublin man.
I could go on and on, in the case of music and history, sometimes a degree of poetic license is used, which over time is accepted as truth.

A favourite Irish song mentions this in the opening line-" Raised an songs and stories, heroes of renown", but some of the songs and stories don't hold up to scrutiny, and this applies world wide.

So, do we just accept that stories and songs have been changed, exaggerated or misinterpreted over decades, or do we call them out as such?

“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Oct 2019 at 05:29
So, do you watch movies and television shows, read a novel once in awhile maybe?  Or are you incredulous about those things as well?  If you want to ban the Bible from your life, that is up to you.  Question, though, what are you going to do with other people who want to learn about it?  Are you going to tolerate them living, or are you planning to "solve" things for them?  If they won't listen to you, how far are you willing to go to "solve" things?

Some of us would think that "songs and stories" hold up to scrutiny, if they are steeped in meaning.  If they are steeped in meaning for people, then small inaccuracies don't bother people much.

I think the Bible is _more_ true, because we can see how it is put together, errors and contradictions make it more human, rather than less.  If it was flawless (internally consistent), it would be more flawed.  That is a paradox, but true.
Back to Top
truthsetsfree View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian


Joined: 30 May 2014
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 202
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote truthsetsfree Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Oct 2019 at 16:25
Generally I have found that the more i tried to objectively see if sources like the bible, Atlantis account, Herodotus, etc have matches with real history I have found they do have more matches than sceptics and critics have otherwise claimed. It is true that embellishments etc occur over time but researchers can eventually show these. One has to prove either way whether source is true history or "myth", one can not just assume/assert they are. I have approached the sources by reading what they say and seeing if they match or not, and when i found they do have matches word for word i took that as proof that the sources are telling the truth.

The reason it is falsely claimed that the bible has little evidence before King David is because they have wrong chronology, not because there are no matches evidences. The chronology/date is the dispute.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Oct 2019 at 17:21
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

So, do you watch movies and television shows, read a novel once in awhile maybe?  Or are you incredulous about those things as well?  If you want to ban the Bible from your life, that is up to you.  Question, though, what are you going to do with other people who want to learn about it?  Are you going to tolerate them living, or are you planning to "solve" things for them?  If they won't listen to you, how far are you willing to go to "solve" things?

Some of us would think that "songs and stories" hold up to scrutiny, if they are steeped in meaning.  If they are steeped in meaning for people, then small inaccuracies don't bother people much.

I think the Bible is _more_ true, because we can see how it is put together, errors and contradictions make it more human, rather than less.  If it was flawless (internally consistent), it would be more flawed.  That is a paradox, but true.

Quote So, do you watch movies and television shows, read a novel once in awhile maybe?

I'm an avid reader and I watch a range of TV shows, mainly non-fiction.

Quote Question, though, what are you going to do with other people who want to learn about it? 

I strongly support peoples right to worship however they please.

Quote Some of us would think that "songs and stories" hold up to scrutiny, if they are steeped in meaning.  If they are steeped in meaning for people, then small inaccuracies don't bother people much.

I agree, but the point of my post is to point out and discuss the fact that stories can change over time. Parabels and fables are instructive, and I have no problem with them.

The Bible contains many very important lessons for living, but, as long as people realise that they are lessons, I have no problem with that.

But my emphasis is not on the Bible, but the way in which factual people and events can be changed over the years. For example, I've seen three different versions of the Battle of Thermopylae, I accept that they are intended to entertain rather than to necessarily educate. My concern is that, again over time, the truth can be lost.

Quote Are you going to tolerate them living, or are you planning to "solve" things for them?  If they won't listen to you, how far are you willing to go to "solve" things?

I find that comment objectionable.
“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Oct 2019 at 17:25
Originally posted by truthsetsfree truthsetsfree wrote:

Generally I have found that the more i tried to objectively see if sources like the bible, Atlantis account, Herodotus, etc have matches with real history I have found they do have more matches than sceptics and critics have otherwise claimed. It is true that embellishments etc occur over time but researchers can eventually show these. One has to prove either way whether source is true history or "myth", one can not just assume/assert they are. I have approached the sources by reading what they say and seeing if they match or not, and when i found they do have matches word for word i took that as proof that the sources are telling the truth.

The reason it is falsely claimed that the bible has little evidence before King David is because they have wrong chronology, not because there are no matches evidences. The chronology/date is the dispute.

Fair comment. Of course there are certain events in ancient history that have been proven by modern science.

Quote One has to prove either way whether source is true history or "myth", one can not just assume/assert they are.

I agree.
“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Oct 2019 at 07:51
The stories are meant to warn us, frighten us, yes cautionary tales for certain. However, there would be no need for caution if the real evil didn't exist. One must be wary of strangers on the wooded path or creatures offering things that seem too good to be true. It's all part of human experience.

How to convey this terror to the faithful or to the young? The faithful have the book of heroes and villains. The European/Asian tribes have horrifying stories. This link has excellent examples of folk stories that were kept alive by parents to scare their kids. Disobedient children could be dead children, so the old stories and-parent participation- kept children from disobeying.
So it's myth but the kernel of truth is all that need be conveyed to stop unwise decisions and preserve life. 



Edited by Vanuatu - 23 Oct 2019 at 21:40
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2019 at 15:23
toyomotor, when you speculated about tearing up the Old and New Testament, it occurred to me that that would not be effective unless you also went after those the Old and New Testaments are embodied in.  Maybe you were talking about tearing up _a_ copy of the Old and New Testament, I don't see the effectiveness in that, and I wonder whether anybody who does that will be satisfied with it ending there.  But if you can be, then good.

Maybe it would be safer to not be a Christian, more Christians have died in the 20th century from martyrdom, than for any other century.  and yet it is interesting who is blamed for being intolerant by the Left.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Oct 2019 at 21:51
The fastest growing groups of Christians are in Asia and Africa. This seems, well miraculous. It's an indicator that the truth found in the ancient writings is the bedrock for civilized thinking. Some are just evolving into a state of mind that wants the reciprocity of prayers to Jesus and a connection to a common 'Father.'

toyomotor, are these new Christians fools? Are they devolving? 

5. THE CENTER OF CHRISTIANITY HAS MOVED TO THE GLOBAL SOUTH.

In 1900, twice as many Christians lived in Europe than in the rest of the world combined. Today, both Latin America and Africa have more. By 2050, the number of Christians in Asia will also pass the number in Europe.

Currently, Christianity is barely growing in Europe (0.04% rate) and only slightly better in North America (0.56%).

Oceania (0.89) and Latin America (1.18%) have marginally better rates, but the faith is exploding in Asia (1.89%) and Africa (2.89%).


Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Oct 2019 at 13:23
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

toyomotor, when you speculated about tearing up the Old and New Testament, it occurred to me that that would not be effective unless you also went after those the Old and New Testaments are embodied in.  Maybe you were talking about tearing up _a_ copy of the Old and New Testament, I don't see the effectiveness in that, and I wonder whether anybody who does that will be satisfied with it ending there.  But if you can be, then good.

Maybe it would be safer to not be a Christian, more Christians have died in the 20th century from martyrdom, than for any other century.  and yet it is interesting who is blamed for being intolerant by the Left.

I think you misunderstood the point that I was making-not literally tearing up the Bible.

What I was eluding to is the fact that much of what is written in the Bible can be shown by modern science to have been, at the very least extremely difficult, or impossible. No doubt the same applies to other historic writings.

The whole point of the OP was to remind us that what we read or see on TV or the movies is -
  • Not as it was originally written;
  • Has been either diluted or exaggerated over the millenia;
  • The product of someone expanding on the original.
Nor is the OP about religious  tolerance or intolerance.

“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
timdr View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 25 Oct 2019
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote timdr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Oct 2019 at 00:32
When discussing the historicity of the bible, I think you have to divide it into 2 separate parts.

1. From the beginning of Genesis until the exodus from Egypt. This the bible itself does not claim was a historical account. Moses did not claim to witness creation, and Abraham did not start writing the bible. It was written later as an account of the origins of the world and the nation. It does not claim to have eyewitnesses, or other normal methods of knowing it. It claims to have been received from God by Moses. That is its only source, according to the bible itself.

2. From around the time of the Exodus, the bible claims to be a historical record. It claims that it was written at the times of the events happening (or shortly after), by the people who experienced it. Even if we reject the supernatural parts of it, it could still be argued that it is a historical account with Religious interpretations of the events. Obviously this would need to allow for exaggeration and distortion. It is not helpful to lump everything together, simply because it is presented as part of the same work. Most people think Jesus is a historical figure, and not a myth, even though most people don't believe all the miracles involving him.

This brings me to a second point: The bible is a long and detailed history of the Jewish nation, stretching over well over a thousand years. Yes there are a number of contradictions, but it is overall remarkably consistent. It features detailed accounts of victories and defeats, with the names of cities and nations involved. It documents a vast amount of interactions with the surrounding peoples, including some of the most powerful and well known nations of the era. They were located in what is sometimes referred to as 'the crossroads of continents'. Any false claims of wars and conquests involving other nearby nations wouldn't have survived too long.

Now obviously, I know this is a hotly debated topic, with bible maximalists and bible minimalists. My question is this: Is there any parallel to the bible which is accepted as false? Can anyone point to a detailed historical record of a nation, which was widely accepted as their history, which was subsequently discovered to be false? It seems to me to be a highly unlikely scenario.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Oct 2019 at 01:28
Originally posted by timdr timdr wrote:


Now obviously, I know this is a hotly debated topic, with bible maximalists and bible minimalists. My question is this: Is there any parallel to the bible which is accepted as false? Can anyone point to a detailed historical record of a nation, which was widely accepted as their history, which was subsequently discovered to be false? It seems to me to be a highly unlikely scenario.
There is no other book so widely accepted and rejected. In this visualized cross reference the commitment to creating a precise narrative is clear. Nowt compares to it. Many archaeological discoveries add credence rather than detract from the accuracy of the bible. In fact dear toyomotor, the Walls of Jericho have been identified and the ruins are suggestive of walls collapsing rather than disintegrating over time.
This is about how the bible speaks to itself - or the textual cross-references within it. The bar graph that runs along the bottom represents all of the chapters in the Bible. Books alternate between white and light gray and the length of each bar denotes the number of verses in the chapter. Each of the 63,779 cross references found in the Bible is depicted by a single arc - the color corresponds to the distance between the two chapters, creating a rainbow-like effect.



Edited by Vanuatu - 25 Oct 2019 at 01:34
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Oct 2019 at 11:09
We should realize that the Bible is not history per se, history is a Greek term meaning "inquiry," the first examples of which we have fragments probably come about in the 500s.  Herodotus is attributed as the first historian, but there are people before him.  The Bible has some historical aspects, but the genera of history doesn't come about until, again, the 500s.  That is not to say that the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament don't have some import as far as depicting ancient cultures are concerned, it is just anachronistic to call them "histories," a chronicle is not a history either.  Inscriptions are useful for later histories, they are source material.  Epics are not histories either, although they can contain "historical" gems, there are however, some epics that treat historical events in the epic style.  These tend to be rather poor and formulaic.  But, my point is that we should not treat the Bible or other ancient works as if they are historical accounts, unless of course, they _are_ historical accounts.  Even then, for ancient histories like Herodotus, Thucydides, Livy, Tacitus, etc. it should be understood that they are part of history developing and gaining in sophistication, whereas we are at stage where histories can be quite sophisticated (and sometimes over-sophisticated).  While we may use the Bible or ancient epics as sources for historical accounts, they are not historical accounts. 
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Nov 2019 at 07:44
I find interesting the references in the Bible to other books (not in the Bible), I think one is the Wars of the Lord.  For most of those, i think that we do not have anything but those references.  although there could be other references in other sources in the Judaic literature.

I am sure that they would not be even half as intriguing if we actually had them!  It is the romance of lost knowledge.

As far as traditions that are false, the Japanese are descended from Amateresu, the sun goddess, through the lineage of the Emperors.  Some people believe the Merovingian kings are descended and the heirs (or maybe I should say errors) of Jesus (Holy Blood, Holy Grail), picked up a book recently called "A Most Dangerous Book" which is how Tacitus "Germanica" (sp?) influenced the nazis in their propaganda.  I think the problem with that one was not so much that it was false, that it was slanted, and the nazis turned criticism of the Germanic tribes into supposedly laudable characteristics.

For the first two, I am not sure I would call them "false," although the myth of the divine emperors, definitely caused damage in WWII,  The Merovingians presents an alternative myth to the usual Christian story.  I don't think the Merovingians present anything about the Jesus 'myth' that you cannot get elsewhere.  
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Nov 2019 at 02:30
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

We've all heard the old story demonstrating gaps in communication, for example WW1 trenches a message passed by word of mouth started as "We're going to advance, send reinforcements", but ended up as "We're going to a dance, send three and fourpence(35cents)".
Word of mouth in the trenches is not a fair comparison to something like the Bible or Aesop's fables. The stories were part of an oral tradition for ages before being written. A very deliberate process of recounting important details that are meant to civilize and tame the world. The stories are not sentimental or sparing of life's struggles it's meant to be a lamp for the path, Navigation of the human experience. 

Quote The Bible says that David slew a giant, Goliath, but in those days any man who was six feet or more in height would have stood out in a crowd, so how tall was Goliath?
All corners of the globe have tales of giants, details differ depending on who wrote them and regional culture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_giants_in_mythology_and_folklore
Puss n Boots is classic example of traceable written tradition with some idea of the cross cultural connecting point. There are versions from Arabia, Africa and Europe. Italians of the Renaissance wrote the stories down and it is well documented that especially Venetians had extensive trade with Arabs for hundreds of years by the time they were written by Italians. Many of the stories are versions of 1001 Arabian Nights and cross cultural connections existed with Africa/Arabia. 


Quote Joshua, at the Battle of Jericho, had his trumpeters march around the city wall, blowing their trumpets until the walls collapsed.
The Leftists NYT has reported feb 1990

After years of doubt among archeologists, a new analysis of excavations has yielded a wide range of evidence supporting the biblical account about the fall of Jericho. It may well be true that, in the words of the old spiritual, ''Joshua fit the battle of Jericho, and the walls come tumbling down.''

A study of ceramic remnants, royal scarabs, carbon-14 dating, seismic activity in the region and even some ruins of tumbled walls produced what is being called impressive evidence that the fortified city was destroyed in the Late Bronze Age, about 1400 B.C.

The prevailing view among scholars has been that the city was destroyed some 150 years earlier and thus did not exist at the time of the Israelite invasion, which is believed to have occurred no earlier than 1400 B.C.

''When we compare the archeological evidence at Jericho with the biblical narrative describing the Israelite destruction of Jericho, we find a quite remarkable agreement,'' Dr. Bryant G. Wood, an archeologist at the University of Toronto, wrote in the March-April issue of Biblical Archeology Review.



Quote I could go on and on, in the case of music and history, sometimes a degree of poetic license is used, which over time is accepted as truth.

A favourite Irish song mentions this in the opening line-" Raised an songs and stories, heroes of renown", but some of the songs and stories don't hold up to scrutiny, and this applies world wide.

So, do we just accept that stories and songs have been changed, exaggerated or misinterpreted over decades, or do we call them out as such?

Things do get changed over time and people have become more sophisticated so the translatable cultural currency has evolved. 
The 'meme' like Nike-"Just Do It"- might be the legacy of ancient storytelling, indeed of all speaking and communication among the masses. Reduced in complexity there is clarity in disseminating information. For better or worse.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2019 at 10:58
Well, if poetry is shown to be not accurate, well then it has to go!  right?

While we are at it, let's correct it for inappropriate political and social bias.  Furthermore, we can simplify the vocabulary, wait a minute, I think "vocabulary" is to complicated a word, so we will just say simplify the words.

There was a guy in the '20s or '30s? that believed we should simplify language as much as possible, he did a translation of Plato's Republic.  On the other hand, when Allan Bloom translated the Republic, he did it as literal as possible, even to the point of some passages being a little stilted.  His model was the medieval William of Moerbroke (sp?) who did a translation of Aristotle from Greek to Latin, the Aristotle translation is famously literal, Moerbroke had a superior manuscript to the one that survived through history, and his translation has been used to correct _our_ Greek manuscript.

So what is worse, whether or not something is factual, or whether in trying to achieve factuality you water down things so much that it doesn't have a kick anymore? (whiskey metaphor).
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2019 at 11:19
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Well, if poetry is shown to be not accurate, well then it has to go!  right?

While we are at it, let's correct it for inappropriate political and social bias.  Furthermore, we can simplify the vocabulary, wait a minute, I think "vocabulary" is to complicated a word, so we will just say simplify the words.

There was a guy in the '20s or '30s? that believed we should simplify language as much as possible, he did a translation of Plato's Republic.  On the other hand, when Allan Bloom translated the Republic, he did it as literal as possible, even to the point of some passages being a little stilted.  His model was the medieval William of Moerbroke (sp?) who did a translation of Aristotle from Greek to Latin, the Aristotle translation is famously literal, Moerbroke had a superior manuscript to the one that survived through history, and his translation has been used to correct _our_ Greek manuscript.

So what is worse, whether or not something is factual, or whether in trying to achieve factuality you water down things so much that it doesn't have a kick anymore? (whiskey metaphor).

Not casting nasturtiums on the writers, simply pointing out, as we well know, that stories can get embellished with retelling over time.

As long as we recognise this, there's no need to-
a. Accept them as being 100% true; or
b. Consider them to be deliberate lies.

On point b. the victors get to write history, so, politically, fibs can creep in. A point in mind is.........




Edited by toyomotor - 25 Nov 2019 at 11:20
“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Nov 2019 at 12:54
Yes, embellished, but also simplified.  See dog run.  Run, dog, run.  (Call of the Wild by Jack London, abbreviated edition).

That the victors get to write history, is one of those truisms, that is not necessarily true.  The Attic orator, Demosthenes was most prolific when he was out of favor. It was because he was out of favor, that he channeled his energy into his writing.  Is Van Gogh, who sold maybe one painting in his lifetime, a victor?  How about Nietzsche, who ended up in an asylum, manipulated by his sister, who was a proto-nazi.  How about Jesus?  Was he a success?  Would he be a failure if he did not get nailed to the cross?  Is Churchill a victor, what about being elected out of office at the end of WWII?  What about Gallipoli.  Americans have a love affair with Churchill, but the truth is much more mixed.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Nov 2019 at 15:15
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Well, if poetry is shown to be not accurate, well then it has to go!  right?

While we are at it, let's correct it for inappropriate political and social bias.  Furthermore, we can simplify the vocabulary, wait a minute, I think "vocabulary" is to complicated a word, so we will just say simplify the words.

There was a guy in the '20s or '30s? that believed we should simplify language as much as possible, he did a translation of Plato's Republic.  On the other hand, when Allan Bloom translated the Republic, he did it as literal as possible, even to the point of some passages being a little stilted.  His model was the medieval William of Moerbroke (sp?) who did a translation of Aristotle from Greek to Latin, the Aristotle translation is famously literal, Moerbroke had a superior manuscript to the one that survived through history, and his translation has been used to correct _our_ Greek manuscript.

So what is worse, whether or not something is factual, or whether in trying to achieve factuality you water down things so much that it doesn't have a kick anymore? (whiskey metaphor).
The language isn't simplified, the_vocabulary_grows. "Chillax" has been added to the dictionary because they were not enough words for slacking. It had to be books and now online reading driving the simplification of ideas in slogan form explaining little, attempts to encompass so much
- Me2?Embarrassed 
It was the reverse in the past, with enormous dramatic adventures that maintain a few definite critical elements. Do you supose people have always chatted away as in modern life? Even during my lifetime talk has cheapened.
 

Quote Not casting nasturtiums on the writers, simply pointing out, as we well know, that stories can get embellished with retelling over time.

toyomotor, never heard the phrase "casting nasturtiums" is it an Irish thing?




Edited by Vanuatu - 26 Nov 2019 at 15:16
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5372
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2019 at 11:58
Quote
toyomotor, never heard the phrase "casting nasturtiums" is it an Irish thing?

It's a joke, a play on words.LOL (aspersions)
“The biggest surprise in a man’s life is old age.”
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Nov 2019 at 12:59
But, of course! nasturtiums! aspersions!  They sound so much alike! Clap

language does get simplified.  Words fall out of favor, meanings disappear, grammar gets simplified.
William F. Buckley Jr. used to argue that the Webster's dictionary should have a list of obsolete words in the back, just so people when reading an old version of Shakespeare could know something is actually a word, even if they have to go to OED to look up the definition.  I mean we are talking about the Unabridged Webster's, which changed their policy, listing new fangled neologisms which are relatively ephemeral, instead of listing words necessary for reading Shakespeare or his contemporaries.

We think we know everything our ancestors knew, but how rational is that believe?  It seems like an emotional pretense to me.  How many scholars of cuneiform are there?  And add to that how many variations of cuneiform is there.  Both in temporal changes in the script, and how many languages are expressed through it?  Sumerian, Babylonian, Old Persian, maybe Aramaic, what else?  Just the shear quantity of the material plus the sparsity of those (halfway) familiar with it.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2169
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Nov 2019 at 14:56
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Quote
toyomotor, never heard the phrase "casting nasturtiums" is it an Irish thing?

It's a joke, a play on words.LOL (aspersions)
Ah. Big smile

They are good for you lots of vitamin C. Associated with war and patriotism.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10441
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Dec 2019 at 09:50
nasturtiums must be an Australian flower, which you throw at the queen as her cart goes by, saying, huzzah!  huzzah!

Being of Judeo-Christian stock, we tend to have a rather historical view of things.  After all, the Holy Bible (Christian version) tells a kind of story from the beginning of Time, to the end time.  Other cultures' sacred writings are not so historical in their perspective or their content. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.