Ancient textual evidence for planetary catastrophe?

[Grey Cloud]

Another perspective:
HOMER AS MUSICAL ALLEGORIST
http://www.ernestmcclain.net/egm-13500-a.pdf
It's all Greek to me.

[Solar]

Lots of interesting links and quotes in there gang. Thank you kindly d.Olivet is fascinating.

Homer was able to go back to the origin of Greek cult and fathom the most hidden meanings of its mysteries 5; it was there that he chose the first and noblest subject of his chants, that which constitutes the fable of the Iliad. † If one must believe in the very singular accounts which time has preserved to us, thanks to the blind zeal...

I find this to be a crucial distinction as pertaining to a central or Perennial Philosophy for which allegory, myth, and metaphor, and symbolism form a "language" having a different character of conveying understanding. People like d'Olivet, F. Bacon and others are particularly fascinating in this regard. D'Olivet makes an easily missed distinction by subtly noting the universality of such accounts stating that " these sorts of collections opened generally with the description of Chaos". That starting point (Chaos) is an aspect in myths around the world. As a result, he would be correct in recognizing compartmentalization of such a reoccurring theme as being the 'belief' in the "singularity" of such accounts.

In one fell swoop, and with as many a sentence, he restores the operative functions of these world stories, despite their culture, form, heroes, or villains - back to their sovereign purpose. Which, as GC conveyed, has the inherent ability to operate "... at several levels simultaneously".

In assessing the general tendency of transliterating or producing "... only cold inanimate copies, deprived of movement and grace." - D'Olivet needed to focus but one of those operative degrees of freedom in order to reveal and convey the persistent "error" of the erudite scholars and "experts" of the day. Watch here as he so focuses that prism to highlight what is needed while refraining from the recognized potential of conveying other degrees of those simultaneous levels upon which these "myths" may work:

But it would be taking me too far away from my subject, examining in detail what might be the meaning of the allegories of Homer. My plan has not been to investigate this meaning in particular, but to show that it exists in general. Upon this point I have not only the rational proof which results from the concatenation of my ideas, but also proof of the fact, which is furnished to me by the testimonials of the ancients. These testimonials are recognized at every step, in the works of the philosophers and chiefly in those of the Stoics. Only a very superficial erudition is necessary to be convinced of this. 1 But I ought to make an observation,

and this observation will be somewhat novel: it is that, the poetic inspiration being once received by the poet and his soul finding itself transported into the intelligible world, all the ideas which then come to him are universal and in consequence allegorical. So that nothing true may exist outside of unity, and as everything that is true is one and homogeneous, it is found that, although the poet gives to his ideas a form determined in the sentient world, this form agrees with a multitude of things which, being distinct in their species, are not so in their genus ...

Owing to his recognition of the universality of "myth", allegory, and symbolism D'Olivet praises Homer for what he did by continuing the central esse 'neath a different guise (The Iliad). He places Homer in league with those antecedent(s) of like, or equal, perception by calling him "... the man of all men, the type of all types, the faithful mirror." With the Iliad Homer rendered an new garment for that which precedes him. Yet, he remained true to that “genius” as it expressed Itself through the epic poem and/or poetry (epopœia).The personification of the passions and perhaps even the personification of celestial events form multi layered aspects or operative "levels" in such great works as the Iliad.

In that regard, and with reference to the essence of these continuous central themes, note the beautiful sentiment "... all ideas becoming reflected have appeared to be created." What a sweet aroma that one is!

n order to attain to the perfection of this kind of poetry, it is necessary to unite to the imaginative faculty which feeds the genius, the reason which regulates the impulse, and the enthusiasm which inflames the mind and supplies the talent. Homer united them in the most eminent degree. Thus he possessed the first inspiration and the complete science, as much in its essence as in its form...

Indeed, the operative "intelligence of the heart" as it is perceived by Schwaller de Lubicz

Thus genius, dominating form, creates master-pieces; form, on the contrary, commanding genius, produces only works of the mind. I must say finally and no longer veil from the attention of my judges, the aim of this discourse: whenever rhyme exists in the poetic form, it renders the form inflexible, it brings upon it only the effort of talent and renders that of intellectual inspiration useless. Never will the people who rhyme their verses attain to the height of poetic perfection; never will real epopœia flourish in their breasts. They will hear neither the accents inspired by Orpheus, nor the stirring and impassioned harmonies of Homer. Far from drawing the allegorical genius at its source and receiving the first inspiration, it will not even recognize the second one. Its poets will polish painfully certain impassioned or descriptive verses, and will call beautiful the works which will only be well done. A rapid glance over the poetic condition of the earth will prove what I have advanced. But I ought to explain beforehand what I understand by first and second inspiration; the moment

p. 43

has arrived for holding to the promise that I made at the beginning of this discourse.

Homer didn't "commanded" the "genius". Perceiving this d'Olivet likens him to being a "faithful mirror". What on earth more can one add to this? Surely one can overly intellectualize and rationalize such things as unscientifically "mystical" or "metaphysical". But that would render one no more than those who put forth the effort to "rhyme their verses" and " ... polish painfully certain impassioned or descriptive verses, and will call beautiful the works which will only be well done. A rapid glance over the poetic condition of the earth will prove what I have advanced." Such a thing being also evident in the works of so called "erudite scholars".

As he sees with Homer, likewise, d'Olivet 'rhymes no verse' and gives "magnetism" no new meaning but instead notes its operations through mankind. Look at the twofold nature of "science". From the original "metaphysics" we have "physics". From the original Alchemy we have "chemistry". From the original "Astrology" we have "astronomy". The tendency of "the West", though not exclusively so, to extract That "life" from that which gave the world some of it's greatest "advances" is commensurate with those who "rhyme their verses". Such is the difference between "East" and "West". Not in terms of geography but in the same allegorical manner with which Homer left untouched the "genius".

As such, on occasion, will one hear even the greatest of modern day "science" and "scientist" at the point of exhaustion or a moment of clarity inspired by the same "muse" in relation to the shear scale and scope of that which they attempt to formalize, harken back to it's true genealogical line with such utterances as "God does not play dice" et al.

I have already said that there was in the secret celebration of the mysteries, veritable dramatic representations. These mystic ceremonies, copied from those which had taken place in the celebration of the Egyptian mysteries, had been brought into Egypt by the Indian priests at a very remote epoch when the empire of Hindustan had extended over this country.
...
Bacon had previously said in speaking of the Greek traditions, "that it was only a very light air which, passing by means of an ancient people into the flutes of Greece, had been modulated by them into sounds more sweet, more harmonious, and more conformable to the climate and to their brilliant imagination."

Taken in accord with d'Olivet's perception of "magnetization" perhaps we see here the inception and origin of “society”. Groups of individuals 'magnetically infused' via these ceremonies from the unorganized "chaos" of what may have been roaming nomadic tribes. The ideas expressed above certainly brings cause to ponder the societal tendencies of humanity. Obviously one can also propose that via "natural selection" groups gather in number and purpose being more effective at survival as well. Just as scholars might cite that rather convenient Darwinist evolutionary 'accident' and subsequently discard the former suggestion as patently mad while branding the maker of same a mere "creationist". But even evolution exhibits an orderly non-random non-trivial progression which eschews Chaos.

d'Olivet's perception of the development of Homer's "ability" to reflect, as opposed to color, the workings of the "genius" through these 'epic cycles' supports the idea that d'Olivet was purposefully focused on qualitatively exposing the lack in scholarly efforts. The quest to succinctly pin down specific dates, times, people and events. It is perhaps the case that today we recognize these epic cycles not only through those scholarly works; but also through those archaeological aspects that are cast aside because they do not fall within the parameters that have been established. Is there an even larger epic cycle which encloses the great kingdoms of Egypt, Greece, Rome, India etc? This was the main point of citing the "Out of Place" artifacts. This appears to be the suggestion with the review Stephan cites with regard to Hapgood book:

The theory before you, if it is believed, is one that questions our whole understanding of the formation of the modern world. It hints at a longer development period for the rise of man, and even suggests that there is a whole age of early civilization that came and went with out leaving much of an entry in the history books, as we understand them today. - Ancient Mysteries

This characteristic, the hint or suggestion of being aware of more than is necessary to convey, is mentioned again by d'Olivet via "The Hebrew Tongue Restored":

I have said that I consider the Hebraic idiom contained in the Sepher, as a transplanted branch of the Egyptian tongue. This is an assertion the historic proof of which I cannot give at this moment, because it would draw me into details too foreign to my subject...

How is it that individuals like d'Olivet, F. Bacon et al can so assuredly hint at the origins of such features in humanity? What were they exposed to such that their assessments and suggestions make learned scholars appear to be groping in the dark chronicling ages that appear to wrapped within larger ages as Hapgood's book and other material appear to suggest? Even the maps provided by Seasmith hint at such a thing, i.e. epicycles within Epic Cycles, by leaving unanswered the question of 'How' relatively accurate of areas like Antarctica were acquired. Perhaps some out of place archaeological objects are remnants from those larger Epic Cycles interspersed within the smaller epicycles such that “...a whole age of early civilization that came and went with out leaving much of an entry in the history books, as we understand them today.”

Fascinating.

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Solar,
Thank you for the very intelligent and thoughtful post.

And thanks to all for a very thought-provoking and stimulating last few days. It will take a while for 'the dust to settle' after reading these posts. (As a reality check we today's TPOD by Rens v. Sluijs ).

We have mentioned d'Olivet, Schwaller, Bacon and others and I would like to mention Manly P. Hall. Anyone who is interested in any of the topics which are discussed in this thread should read Hall's The Secret Teachings of All Ages. Encyclopaedic knowledge written in absolutely beautiful Edwardian English. He wrote the book in his early twenties! In the eighty or so years since it was written it has never, to my knowledge, been equalled, and it certainly has not been bettered. I have heard lectures by him too, both audio and video. He speaks just as he writes and weaves a beautiful tapestry with his words, drawing his threads from Nordic mythology, Buddhism and Greek philosophy for example. His interpretation of the Nordic creation myth which, needless to say, begins with an account of chaos, is one of my all-time favourites - I was there I only wish I could have stayed there.

[Brigit Bara]

Thank you for your response. I am glad the link had fond memories for you.

You brought up many points, but I think the main issue here is whether the Babel event in Genesis 11 was meant by its author to communicate a catastrophe or not. You said, "Nothing is destroyed here--there is no catastrophe," and "I've mentioned the non-catastrophe above."

But first let me address the point about whether the story of the Tower of Babel is internally consistent. Grey Cloud wrote:

"Gen 11:4 states: And they said, Come, let us build to ourselves a city and tower, whose top shall be to heaven, and let us make to ourselves a name, before we are scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth.
This implies that they knew they were to be scattered abroad before the omniscient Lord spotted them (Gen 11:5-6).

I dealt with this by quoting the verse in which Noah was told to "multiply, and fill the earth." (9:1) The building of the city was in opposition to the mandate given to Noah and his descendents. The progression here is very simple:
1. a command to fill the earth; 2. a decision not to "be scattered" 3. they are scattered.
The text is consistent with itself--there is no one acting on things they logically should not have known, and there is no surprise or discovery in Gen 11: 5,6 as you have suggested.

Your thread asks for "ancient textual evidence for planetary catastrophe." I held that 1.) the Babel narrative is an ancient text, or, if you prefer, is based on ancient sources for Semitic traditions. 2.) that the Babel event is planetary, and 3.) that it does reflect a catastrophe. So that brings us to the question of the author's intent.

The narrative uses the term "scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth" twice, and "scattered abroad" once, thus showing by emphasis and repetition (3x) that this is the reason for telling the story. The confusion of the languages is mentioned twice by comparison, and the ceasing of building the tower only once.

Put side by side and in context with these verses:
11:8 "the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth" (3x)
10:25 "in his days the earth was divided" (ha eretz)
10:32 "the nations were divided on the earth after the flood"
10:5 "the coastland peoples of the Gentiles were separated into their own lands, everyone according to his own language..."


I think it is safe to say that the author meant to explain that various peoples were physically separated from eachother. He is talking about something geographic, and cataclysmic, and very difficult to overcome. Also, the lifespans of the men in the geneologies decline consistently after that, suggesting a change in conditions on earth.

As for the rivers in Eden--

I can see that you need a little more time with my (admittedly peculiar) Eden-on-a-smaller-globe idea. So, leaving the smaller earth scenario aside, I will ask you: what did the mid-Atlantic Ridge look like in its earliest stages on Pangea? By all accounts, it began as a river, and continued growing, or spreading, as we see here http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/dynamic.pdf
That is why I referred to the mid-ocean ridges as having formerly been rivers.
That is also why I went to the trouble to show that Peleg's name not only meant "divide" and "earthquake," but also "river" or "channel." I am speculating that the continents were broken apart along the ridges (then the 4 rivers of Eden) within human memory. You offered an alternative for Gen.10:25 suggesting that when it says "the earth was divided," it might refer to the the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. Here we are partially in agreement as the Indian Ocean rift disappears under those very inlets. The book of Zechariah speaks of a great valley opening up, dividing the Mt. of Olives in half, and allowing the people in Jerusalem to escape the huge army that has surrounded it (Zech. 14:4 &c.). It later flows with a wide river. My point being that there may be some continuity here--and in other verses--with my interpretation and the rest of the Bible. (I do not know why that Jerusalem rift goes west-east.)

Finally, I am glad you found a location for Eden to your satisfaction in such a short time. Most Bible scholars and teachers say that it cannot be located with any certainty and that catastrophes have changed the earth's surface since then.

My intention was to make myself clear and answer some of your points. Best in your quest.
Regards, brigitbara

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Brigit,
Whether the Genesis account is internally consistent is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the account is consistent with the real world. I maintain that it is not because there were already people in India, China, the Americas etc long before this supposed diaspora mentioned in Genesis. Furthermore these peoples were already using different languages.
One could add to this that the Genesis account is in any case not the original version. The same story is to be found in other Mesopotamian cultures.

As to the 'author's intent' First there is more than one author involved in the writing of Genesis and second, at this remove it is impossible to state with any certainty what the intent was.

I stand by my statement that there is no catastrophe mentioned or hinted at in the Genesis account of the Tower of Babel. You cannot show where it says anything to the contrary.

Whether we take the decline in lifespans literally or not it does not necessarily follow that it was the result of changed conditions on Earth. It could just as easily have been the result of a change of diet or lifestyle or exposure to some new life-threatening disease or illnes.

According to the experts Pangea existed around 250 million years ago yet the events in the OT are supposed to have occurred only a few thousand years ago. How, therefore, can you equate the two? There is also the problem of whether Pangea existed at all. The theory of plate techonics has only been around since about the middle of the last century and science originally fought tooth and nail against its acceptance.

I still fail to see how the meaning of the name Peleg has any relationship to either Pangea, mid-ocean ridges or plate techtonics - or anything else really.

Neither can I see any relationship between Zechariah and the Tower of Babel story. The passage in Zechariah (14:4 etc) which you mentioned appears to be talking about future events not something which has happened so I fail to see the point of it.

My points about the location of Eden were the result of a few minutes googling and thinking. They were not meant ot be the last word on the location. Also I have read and thought about the Eden issue on several occassions over the years. Here again the Genesis account is not
original as this story exists in several Mesopotamian cultures which pre-date the Genesis account. In fact accounts of lost paradises exist in many cutlures from around the world. I have little or no interest in what what Bible scholars and teachers say.

On a general note, you appear to read the Bible literally whereas I tend not to. I find it more profitable to read it in terms of allegory, metaphor, symbolism and correspondence. You may want to read the contents of this, now very long, thread as there are many thought-provoking and insightful posts relating to many divers subjects and ancient texts.

[nick c]

Hello Brigit Bara, GC,

Whether the Genesis account is internally consistent is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether the account is consistent with the real world. I maintain that it is not because there were already people in India, China, the Americas etc long before this supposed diaspora mentioned in Genesis.

I agree, internal consistency is irrelevant, otherwise there would be very little to study with regard to ancient myth, as consistency (of any sort) is not a requirement of myth (in which category I would include the OT, though that does not discount some degree of historical value.) The modern reader cannot help but notice the "miraculous" qualities of these stories. What is important is external consistency. That is, which elements of such stories can be related to the stories of other nations in other parts of the world as well as other versions within the same culture. This comparative consistency of unusual details, scenarios, characters, actions etc. require explanations, the more so the more outrageous or unbelievable the commonality.

I stand by my statement that there is no catastrophe mentioned or hinted at in the Genesis account of the Tower of Babel.

Here is the problem, by putting on blinders and narrowing the focus to one particular story opportunity for discovery is missed. The tower of Babel story is revealed to be tale of catastrophe when one compares it to similar or parallel tales in other parts of the world, as well as other Hebrew sources such as rabbinical texts.
So what commonalities are presented in the Babel tale?
Velikovsky has shown that there are elements that are in common with other myths from other nations.
-Deluge...the story follows the actions of the survivors of a great flood.
-Survivors build a large building or tower. The tower of Babel is a ziggarut, at least that is what the author seems to be refering to, that is, he was probably applying this old tradition to his own time...Babylon would have been a great city of the author's time with large ziggaruts. He is setting the story on a stage that is in the context of his experience. People all around the world built pyramids, ziggurats, towers, mounds...artificial mountains celebrating the deluge and the emergence of the primeval mound. This practice continued well into the Christian era.
-The tale tells of the "confounding of language." Interesting that, though the tale seems to try to explain the origin of different languages, a careful reading tells us that nobody could communicate with any other person...Genesis 11:7 "...confound their language that they may not understand one another's speech."

That this tale is a catastrophe story:

The rabbinical sources explain that the purpose of the Tower was to secure a shelter for the city of Babel in case the Deluge should occur another time:


The men who were before us God has destroyed with a deluge; if he shall again think fit to be wroth with us, and seek to destroy us even with a deluge, we shall all perish to a man. But come, let us prepare bricks and burn them with fire, that they may withstand the waters and building them together with asphalt, let us make a high tower the top of which shall reach to heaven, in order that being delivered from the deluge we may find safety in the tower.(2)
http://www.varchive.org/itb/confus.htm#f_2

A Mesoamerican version which has the common points of building a large building as a reaction to a deluge, and when it is destroyed people cannot converse with each other:

This purpose of the builders is found also in an account of this catastrophe which the aborigines of Central America transmitted from generation to generation. Ixtlilxochitl, after narrating the story of the Deluge which brought to a close the first world age, Atonatiuh, and destroyed most of mankind, described the catastrophe which ended the second age or Ehecatonatiuh—"the sun of wind.”


And as men were thereafter multiplying they constructed a very high and strong Zacualli, which means “a very high tower” in order to protect themselves when again the second world should be destroyed. At the crucial moment their languages were changed, and as they did not understand one another,they went into different parts of the world.(3)

The same author also gives another version of the same catastrophe:


When 1715 years had passed since the Deluge [men] were destroyed by a violent hurricane (Uracan) which carried off trees, mountains, houses and people, and great buildings, although many men and women escaped, especially those that were able to take refuge in caves and places where this great hurricane could not reach.(4)

Similarly wrote Gomara (ca. 1510-1560): “The wind which occurred at that time was so great and of such force that it overthrew all buildings and trees, and even broke mountains apart.” (5)
http://www.varchive.org/itb/confus.htm#f_3

And in Polynesia:

For instance, on the island of Hao, part of the Puamotu (or Tuamotu) islands in Polynesia, the people used to tell that after a great flood the sons of Rata, who survived, made an attempt to erect a building by which they could reach the sky and see the creator god Vatea (or Atea). “But the god in anger chased the builders away, broke down the building, and changed their language, so that they spoke divers tongues.”(11)
http://www.varchive.org/itb/confus.htm#f_3

Taken in the broader context of comparison the tale of the Tower of Babel is indeed a catastrophic tale. The location of the Genesis story is largely irrelevant, as is any part of any tale that is unique to that tale. The important point is that after a great flood, humans recovered and built buildings in reaction to that catastrophe in anticipation of another, when the next catastrophe (which was not a flood) struck, causing large buildings to topple, people were no longer able to communcate. The sources that Velikovsky quotes describe a great winds and electrical discharges. This could have had an effect on the ability to speak, or, could describe some change of environmental conditions (of an electrical nature?) that no longer allowed a previously used means of communicating.
The common elements of these stories from diverse parts of the world are unusual when each is examined individually, but even more so when these unusual events are given in the same sequential order. Coincidence or diffusion is not an acceptable explanation, imhop.

nick c

[Grey Cloud]

Here's another take on the Tower of Babel:

For I suppose that to men so ignorant as you I must say nothing about the fact that, even if all men throughout the inhabited world ever employ one speech and one language, they will not be able to build a tower that will reach to the heavens, even though they should turn the whole earth into bricks. For such a tower will need countless bricks each one as large as the whole earth, if they are to succeed in reaching to the orbit of the moon. For let us assume that all mankind met together, employing but one language and speech, and that they made the whole earth into bricks and hewed out stones, when would it reach as high as the heavens, even though they spun it out and stretched it till it was finer than a thread? Then do you, who believe that this so obvious fable is true, and moreover think that God was afraid of the brutal violence of men, and for this reason came down to earth to confound their languages, do you, I say, still venture to boast of your knowledge of God?

But I will go back again to the question how God confounded their languages. The reason why he did so Moses has declared: namely, that God was afraid that if they should have one language and were of one mind, they would first construct for themselves a path to the heavens and then do some mischief against him. But how he carried this out Moses does not say at all, but only that he first came down from heaven,—because he could not, as it seems, do it from on high, without coming down to earth.
AGAINST THE GALILAEANS
Julian the Apostate
Book I
http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Julian.html

[seasmith]

Side note on the subject of 27/28 - 56 (plasmic ? ) occurrences:

Re: the "moon wheels" from Kevin's freepage source above-

However here I make a category of the Indian naksatras and the moon wheel with ca 28 rays alternatively 56 rays.

For the exact counting 27 mansions of the moon would not do. The system counting nights is maybe the oldest invention and the Indians made it a system with 28 mansions and the 28 at asterism Vega was used for intercalation.

But why then 56 rays? Hard to know but the intercalation asked for following two whole years. Another possibility is that they maybe counted "forthnights" and the use of counting "new moon" and "full moon" that are natural events "as-we-see-it". The 56 so-called Aubrey holes at Stonehenge could have been the first thought when they began to make the observatory.

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ances ... s/0moon.htm

These from (fossil) organisms have 27 rays.
Perhaps branching from a brachial 28 plasma/genetic expression;
using 1 as the central spine ??

Just a wild thought...

http://www.sciam.com/slideshow.cfm?id=b ... 3F2C9025C5
[for terriffic larger images]
~

[seasmith]

nick c wrote:

The sources that Velikovsky quotes describe a great winds and electrical discharges. This could have had an effect on the ability to speak, or, could describe some change of environmental conditions (of an electrical nature?) that no longer allowed a previously used means of communicating.

Nick,
From the same archive, you might have also quoted:

The electro-convulsive therapy used in psychiatry for the treatment of certain mental cases is administered by passing current through electrodes on the forehead. Conducted through the brain, the electric discharge causes a period of confusion and a subsequent complete, though temporary, loss of memory of the events immediately preceding the discharge. A number of patients complain also of consequent disturbances of longer duration, and some of them suffer a patchy, retrograde amnesia. See the article by Siskind in Archive of Neurological Psychiatry (Chicago, 1941), p. 215, 223.

and

Hesiod described the battle with the giants as an immense catastrophe involving the earth and heaven alike.

The boundless sea rang terribly around, and the earth crashed loudly: wide heaven was shaken and groaned, and high Olympus reeled from its foundations under the charge of the undying gods, and a heavy quaking reached Tartarus. . . . the cry of both armies as they shouted reached to starry heaven.

Then Zeus no longer held back his might; but straight his heart was filled with fury and he showed forth all his strength. From heaven and from Olympus he came forthwith, hurling his lightning: the bolts flew thick and fast from his strong hand, together with thunder and lightning, whirling and awesome flame. The life-giving earth crashed around in burning, and the vast wood cracked loud with fire all about. All the land seethed, and Ocean’s streams and the unfruitful sea. The hot vapour lapped round the earthborn Titans: flame unspeakable rose to the bright upper air: the flashing glare of the thunder shone and lightning blinded their eyes, for all that they were strong.

It seemed as if Earth and wide Heaven above came together; for such a mighty crash would have arisen if the Earth were being hurled to ruin and Heaven from on high were hurling her down.

. . . Also the winds brought rumbling earthquake and duststorm, thunder and lightning, and the lurid thunderbolt, which are the shafts of great Zeus.

[Which we quoted from a different source previously in this thread~]

http://www.varchive.org/itb/confus.htm#f_2

s

[nick c]

Hi seasmith,
Thanks for the Hesiod quote, it is from the Theogony, I believe. I need to read more of Hesiod, there is so much to learn and so little time!

Also the winds brought rumbling earthquake and duststorm, thunder and lightning, and the lurid thunderbolt, which are the shafts of great Zeus.

This is a remarkable quote, here the author is distinguishing between earthly thunder and lightning, and cosmic thunderbolts. Very important! How would they know of such a thing if they never had that experience?

nick c

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Seasmith,
Awesome images. I just love images of the microcosmic world.

[StefanR]

Fascinating.

Yes and likewise was your post there. As a blade through butter.
I'll have to get back to some of the things you say there.

He speaks just as he writes and weaves a beautiful tapestry with his words, drawing his threads from Nordic mythology, Buddhism and Greek philosophy for example. His interpretation of the Nordic creation myth which, needless to say, begins with an account of chaos, is one of my all-time favourites - I was there I only wish I could have stayed there.

You got me confused there, stay there with Hall or chaos? Although I have that book, in a strange way I have always been a little hesitant with Hall, that is because of the persistant connection in my brain between Hall and Crowley. Very odd.

[Eric Cantona is God. Bergkamp played for Arsenal so he wasn't that good]

Oh silly me, and all this time I was thinking you were talking about football


Cantona in possesion of the ball

[seasmith]

Another calamity from circa 3600 years ago:

.

..a new assessment of the demise of the coastal Peruvian people who built the earliest, largest structures in North or South America before disappearing in the space of a few generations more than 3,600 years ago.

The people of the Supe Valley ... built extremely large, elaborate, stone pyramid temples -- thousands of years before the better-known pyramids crafted by the Maya.
The Supe seemed to thrive in the valley for about 2,000 years. But around 3,600 years ago, an enormous earthquake -- Moseley estimates its magnitude at 8 or higher -- or series of earthquakes struck ... the region remains one of the most seismically active in the world

.

http://www.innovations-report.com/html/ ... 25824.html

GC,
Know you're not an afficiando of geoarcheology, but the continually recurring time period seemed worthy of a mention.
s

[Brigit Bara]

nick c,

You tricked me into reading Velikovsky.

Thank you. :)

[redeye]

Cantona in possesion of the ball

You'd better hope he doesn't read Thunderbolts!

Cantona

Cheers!