In Reply to: Re: Ross' Points posted by John Joseph on September 27, 2001 at 07:04:23:
: "he [Ross] also said he'd received all sorts of mail refuting many of our claims but that he wouldn't reveal names because the
: people feared harassment.... he meant of course that Aramaen from hell Johnny what's his name and John Joseph...."
: >>>Why do you think I would do something so shabby? I have never corresponded with Ross. You show me one thing that I have written against the ancient Assyrians. Below are a few lines from my recent book, whose coverage of our various names remains a big dark secret on these forums:
>>>I don't know you, only rumors about you and the fact that Dr. Ross felt he had ally in you. Any number of things, including spelling, grammar and logic remain a big dark secret on these forums.
: --Footnote 31 Ibn al-’Ibri [Bar Hebraeus, who referred to the ancient Chaleans as magicians] obviously was not aware of the ancient Chaldeans’ achievements in astronomy. As early as the seventh century B.C., the study of astronomy in Babylon had begun to conform to present reckoning; lunar year had 354 days, regulated into 12 months, alternating between 29 and 30 days. See Bernard Grun, The Timetables of History (New York, 1975), p. 11. For the various usages of the term Chaldean, including its reference to a priestly class, see F. Rochberg-Halton, “New evidence for the History of Astrology,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 43 (1984), 115-16.
>>>Ross' point was that you, and others, question our claim that we are associated with, descended from, the ancient Assyrians.
: 55. The Ashurbanipal palace library’s 22,000 clay tablets cover subjects in history, medicine, astronomy, astrology and recorded information on the movement of planets and signs of the zodiac. For the fascinating story of these early excavations and their translation, see C. Wade Meade, Road to Babylon, Development of U.S. Assyriology (Leiden 1974). After World War II the excavations at Nimrud were re-opened (1949) by Max Mallowan on behalf of the British School of Archaeology in Iraq. The team worked there until 1963, under the direction of David Oates. Since 1963 several teams have excavated at Nimrud, including an expedition from the British Museum in 1989. For a summary article see John Curtis, “Nimrud: Ancient and Modern,” The Illustrated London News, 280 (Summer 1992), 75-77.
>>>Ross would not dispute these points, neither do you...what Ross and you claim is that we had nothing to do with those people and their culture.
: -- 59 If some cuneiform tablets corroborated parts of the historical books of the Bible, others seemed to challenge their originality. In the 1870s George Smith stirred England with the announcement of his discovery of a tablet containing a parallel to the legend of the deluge in Genesis. Other tablets he deciphered contained, he reported, accounts of the origin of the world, the creation of animals and man, and the fall of man from a sinless state. Such documents fueled Biblical criticism adding to the secular challenges to revealed religion that eighteenth- and nineteenth-century discoveries in geology, anthropology and biology had already produced. The Assyrian documents, it was argued, now proved that the ancient Hebrews, like other peoples, had simply added to what they had borrowed from much older neighboring cultures; that it was Christian bias which placed Israel/Palestine at center stage. See George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis (New York, 1876), p. 17. See also Stephanie Dalley, Myths from Mesopotamia, Creation, the Flood, Gilgamesh and Others (Oxford, 1989), pp. 7 seq., and H.W.F. Saggs, The Encounter with the Divine in Mesopotamia and Israel. London, 1978.Consult also Darwin’s Origin of the Species, published in 1859 when the excitement of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian excavations was reaching its peak. For a delightful account of these challenges, read Naomi Shepherd, The Zealous Intruders, The Western Rediscovery of Palestine (London 1987); see also Emil G. Kraeling, The Old Testament since the Reformation, (New York, 1955) pp. 91 seq.; S.J. Barrows, “Assyriology and the Bible,” Unitarian Review and Religious Magazine, 12 (1879), seq. 46, and George Sarton, History of Science (Baltimore, 1927-1949), vol. 1, p. 246.
>>>No one argues these points, well...Ross would only go a little way down the road you are pointing out. But this wasn't the context in which your name was mentioned...stick to the point. The point being that Ross feels he has a friend in you, someone who also disputes our connection to the ancient Assyrians. Sticking to the point is also hard to find on these forums.
Post a Followup