tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
duplicate
Does History matter?
- Thread starter Gmart
- Start date
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Which would be germane if tl had claimed there were no evidence of the seige and the battle, but as tl only claimed that there was no evidence of mass suicide I find it difficult to discern what point you're trying to make except for if you're "grandstanding".astronaut said:
He was?
It might be 20 years plus since I read Josephus, but I'm fairly sure that while he relates events he never actually claims to be "on the scene". Mind you, he doesn't use the Herodotian formula of "I was told by...(add name of credible witness)" either.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Any academic who claims objectivity is a charlatan, or worse, a politician in academic guise.astronaut said:
Any academic will happily acknowledge that their work contains a degree of subjectivity
Who's denying it?
The trick is to acknowledge the degree of subjectivity and to point it out. That way others can form their own judgements.
Anyone who forms concrete conclusions based on partial or subjective evidence isn't bothered about subjectivity, they're too busy indulging in ideologically-motivated mythology-creation for that.
Tangent: "Masada." Yes, Yadin DID neglect to include the history of the Siicari [Zealots] but it was not his responsibility to talk about that. It is no secret to Jew or non-Jew alike that that group was bloody and what we would call fundamentalist. What Yadin concentrated on was the proven fact [now] that the sacrafice DID occurr there.
I wonder though Tangent, what does Masada have to do with a historical claim to the land? It happened just before the end of the Roman Conquest. Jews had already been there for well over 2000 years by that time.
"Hopelessly biased?" Actually, the article is 100 percent correct.
The second link in the same post does not work.
As for your theory about the suicide actually having been the massacare committed by the Masadaim is ridiculous. Josephus was not above embellishment but why would he list the massacare of the village, AND the mass suicide? If he used the village as inspiration, he would not have used it as well! It is also listed in Roman records so I do not know where you find that "there is no evidence of it."
Sicarrii did not use daggers that looked like crosses. They were very short, very thin, like a "shiv."
"Josephus was not there." Actually, he was not there when the suicide happened but he WAS there at the siege. He was also there afterwards so it is safe to say that it is a first person account, although, with minor embellishments as Josephus was an egosit by all accounts. Although converted, he still took pride in Jewish feats. He has been a leader of a band in the insurrection so he felt a kinship with Ben Yair.
As for a connection to Judas, that is just nuts.
Astronaut: Yes, good words to remember. however, it is also good to remember that our ancestors loved their people so much that they would rather kill their own seed then have their seed spread among goyim. That is the ultimate message offered by the event. It is also the event hammered home when IDF stand atop with torches and swear to never let it happen again.
Laptop: "Which is dispouted." Not mby mainstream scientists. It is actually the accepted premise supported by physical evidence, etc.
"Invasion." Yes, 4000 years ago Jews did INVADE what is now Israel. However, any nations then existing there have long been extinct. Noone can challenge Israel's claim on that basis.
Moono: "Nothing noble about suicide." True. The nobility however is found in the sentiment behind it. they so loved their wives, children, and people that they would rather kill them then to see them defamed by heathens.
[Edited to remove two sentences and fix grammar]
I wonder though Tangent, what does Masada have to do with a historical claim to the land? It happened just before the end of the Roman Conquest. Jews had already been there for well over 2000 years by that time.
"Hopelessly biased?" Actually, the article is 100 percent correct.
The second link in the same post does not work.
As for your theory about the suicide actually having been the massacare committed by the Masadaim is ridiculous. Josephus was not above embellishment but why would he list the massacare of the village, AND the mass suicide? If he used the village as inspiration, he would not have used it as well! It is also listed in Roman records so I do not know where you find that "there is no evidence of it."
Sicarrii did not use daggers that looked like crosses. They were very short, very thin, like a "shiv."
"Josephus was not there." Actually, he was not there when the suicide happened but he WAS there at the siege. He was also there afterwards so it is safe to say that it is a first person account, although, with minor embellishments as Josephus was an egosit by all accounts. Although converted, he still took pride in Jewish feats. He has been a leader of a band in the insurrection so he felt a kinship with Ben Yair.
As for a connection to Judas, that is just nuts.
Astronaut: Yes, good words to remember. however, it is also good to remember that our ancestors loved their people so much that they would rather kill their own seed then have their seed spread among goyim. That is the ultimate message offered by the event. It is also the event hammered home when IDF stand atop with torches and swear to never let it happen again.
Laptop: "Which is dispouted." Not mby mainstream scientists. It is actually the accepted premise supported by physical evidence, etc.
"Invasion." Yes, 4000 years ago Jews did INVADE what is now Israel. However, any nations then existing there have long been extinct. Noone can challenge Israel's claim on that basis.
Moono: "Nothing noble about suicide." True. The nobility however is found in the sentiment behind it. they so loved their wives, children, and people that they would rather kill them then to see them defamed by heathens.
[Edited to remove two sentences and fix grammar]
Rachamim;
Lol. That depicts a certain arrogance that I've come to associate with the stereotype which you promote, Rachamim.
Their wives and children might have enjoyed the company of strangers more than that of the prick who'd rather cut their throats than consider being wrong.
Anyway, that's murder. I thought the story described suicide.
Lol. That depicts a certain arrogance that I've come to associate with the stereotype which you promote, Rachamim.
Their wives and children might have enjoyed the company of strangers more than that of the prick who'd rather cut their throats than consider being wrong.
Anyway, that's murder. I thought the story described suicide.
tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
Find it also here: http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=4692760&postcount=39rachamim18 said:
david dissadent
New Member
At the time of the Balfour declaration the UK was conquering the Arabian Peninsula of off the Ottomans.snorbury said:
Why would they need a bridgehead when they were within touching distance of having the lands under there direct rule?
tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
Rachamim,
In talking of Masada, i am NO WAY taking a POP at you, or making light of your making of an oath on that monumental mountain, nor of the significance of Masada to modern patriots, or to the history of The Jewish People as a whole.
No. What I'm looking at is how my beloved 'pet' subjects of Arch & Anth have yet again been hijacked for political ends, bringing discredit on those disciplines & academics who promote them.
The 'puffed up truth' is actually an undermining force for Israel's case/cause, imo, and surely there's no hurt to let new findings replace old myths in the long run, or to allow others to see the high level of academic debate which the subject of historic 'back-up' provokes, inside Israel itself.
In talking of Masada, i am NO WAY taking a POP at you, or making light of your making of an oath on that monumental mountain, nor of the significance of Masada to modern patriots, or to the history of The Jewish People as a whole.
No. What I'm looking at is how my beloved 'pet' subjects of Arch & Anth have yet again been hijacked for political ends, bringing discredit on those disciplines & academics who promote them.
The 'puffed up truth' is actually an undermining force for Israel's case/cause, imo, and surely there's no hurt to let new findings replace old myths in the long run, or to allow others to see the high level of academic debate which the subject of historic 'back-up' provokes, inside Israel itself.
tangentlama
Nameless voices crying
I have lots of theories. Another is that Josephus lied about the Siscarii 'massacre' at En Gedi - which was actually carried out by crack Roman assassins who massacred the residents of En Gedi, and tried to pin it on the Siscarii to discredit them with their fellow Jews and decrease public support for their political and militarial activities, as well as using it as a reason to drive out 'insurgents' and long-standing Jewish populations.rachamim18 said:
laptop said:
No it is not. You have made the elementary error of conflating "subjective" with "relative." Obviously everything is subjective, because everything is experienced *by* a subject. Equally, everything is objective because everything is experience *of* an object. These facts in no way indicate that truth is relative. Obviously.
Moono: "Enjoyed the company?" Really? Who enjoys being raped and enslaved, if not gutted while alive? I wonder about the company you keep [sic].
As for suicide, very few on Masada committed it. Each man murdered his family, then was murdered by his comrades, and the last one left killed himself. So, one can only say a single person committed suicide.
Tangent: Thank you for updating the link.
Now, as for the second link, ...Listen, I know that you of all people do not resort to childish antics and direct things personally. Still, I have to call it as I see it. I do not see it as a case of those two sciences having been manipulated in this case.
When people speak of physical evidence one must realise that Jews bury their dead within 24 hours. The bodies would have been either burned and limed by the romans or fellow Jews would have afforded a proper burial. Other physical evidence would have been looted long ago. Yet there is some evidence that supports the event. Shards with names on them, indicating lots were taken as related by Josephus and others, have been found. Day to day objects unrelated to its use as a Herodian palace [it was a royal palace] have also been unearthed. there are no accounts of anyone other than Zealots having taken up residence there so there is substantial reason for many to take the story as is.
If for example, evidence to the contrary were to come to light, it would not make much difference. Masada, while inspiring to many Jews, and also providing an important lesson on instragience and obstinance, is not an integral part of Jewish history.
As for Josephus lying about the perpertrators of Ein Gedi, well, I do not see why he would do that. He seems to be very pragmatic while still relishing his true peoples' accomplishments. One would think that if your theory held weight, Josephus would have written about it.
As for suicide, very few on Masada committed it. Each man murdered his family, then was murdered by his comrades, and the last one left killed himself. So, one can only say a single person committed suicide.
Tangent: Thank you for updating the link.
Now, as for the second link, ...Listen, I know that you of all people do not resort to childish antics and direct things personally. Still, I have to call it as I see it. I do not see it as a case of those two sciences having been manipulated in this case.
When people speak of physical evidence one must realise that Jews bury their dead within 24 hours. The bodies would have been either burned and limed by the romans or fellow Jews would have afforded a proper burial. Other physical evidence would have been looted long ago. Yet there is some evidence that supports the event. Shards with names on them, indicating lots were taken as related by Josephus and others, have been found. Day to day objects unrelated to its use as a Herodian palace [it was a royal palace] have also been unearthed. there are no accounts of anyone other than Zealots having taken up residence there so there is substantial reason for many to take the story as is.
If for example, evidence to the contrary were to come to light, it would not make much difference. Masada, while inspiring to many Jews, and also providing an important lesson on instragience and obstinance, is not an integral part of Jewish history.
As for Josephus lying about the perpertrators of Ein Gedi, well, I do not see why he would do that. He seems to be very pragmatic while still relishing his true peoples' accomplishments. One would think that if your theory held weight, Josephus would have written about it.
Similar threads
