Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tidal Waves or Tsunamis in Ancient Literature
#16
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Thera Eruption hypothesis, Jona....the links between the event and the fall of Cretan civilisation are not so immediate as was once thought, but it did strike a blow that apparently kicked off Minoan decline ( there is archeological evidence and support among historians for this).
Nor is it unlikely that memories of this event would echo down the ages in legends like the Atlantis one, or Moses and the parting of the Red Sea.....

We cannot say for sure, the evidence being so slender, but the possibility is most certainly there..... Smile
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)

"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
Reply
#17
Hi Jim,
Quote:
Vortigern Studies:1iavei45 Wrote:Marshland is usually not becoming that much dryer when a tsunami pulls the water out sea. Does the eastern Mediterranean have much of a tidal zone?

So maybe there was no tsunami at all?
It doesn't matter about tidal zones. Tsunamis have nothing to do with tides, they're the result of a massive displacement by undersea earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and landslides (and meteorites).
Thanks for the lecture, but I know.. I probably see the same documenteries as you do Big Grin

The question was about the route of a mass of people running from a mad bad king - you just dont take a route across a marsh or a tidal zone. :wink: And if they stayed clear of either, any tsunami would not have cleared a dry path for them. So either you go for the tsunami but you end up with an imposssible route, or you go for the 'acceptable rout'but then the tsunami does not affect anyone.

Quote:The marsh in question extended into the Mediterranean (it's north of the Red Sea on the other side of the land mass) and the water came directly from the Med, the marsh populated with reeds

and the time estimated (scientifically) for the water to return to the marsh is twenty minutes, the scale of the tsunami and drawback being so great after the eruption.
Even with the 'water away from the marsh', it's still a vast stretch of sogging mud. No Moses with abit of a brain would lead his people through thát!
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#18
Hi Jona,
Was Exodus written 400-300 BC or AD? Either way it seems very young, or does that allow for earlier writing being present and only taking a final shape at that time?

Quote:All theories pass along the obvious point: the authors describe a miracle - so looking for a natural explanation is (in my opinion) the wrong approach.
Ah, but I learnt at a young age that miracles need not be inexplainable events, the miracle is in the timing of the event.
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#19
Quote:The question was about the route of a mass of people running from a mad bad king - you just dont take a route across a marsh or a tidal zone. :wink: And if they stayed clear of either, any tsunami would not have cleared a dry path for them. So either you go for the tsunami but you end up with an imposssible route, or you go for the 'acceptable rout'but then the tsunami does not affect anyone.

Ummm.... so you lead them to the big impassable and very deep Red Sea instead? Now that's reeeaaaallllllyyyyy dumb. Also, they didn't know a tsunami's about to hit; Moses didn't have a subscription to New Scientist. They saw the waters draw back. Now what would that suggest to a deeply religious man in those times? God saying "Go for it, boy, go for it!" perhaps? Jona also mentions the plume of smoke.... hmmmmmmmmmm.

Quote:Even with the 'water away from the marsh', it's still a vast stretch of sogging mud. No Moses with abit of a brain would lead his people through thát!
You know it was impassable how? And I come back to my point about the uselessness of leading them to a much larger body of completely un-wade-able sea. It may have been hard going, but if a marsh can be waded through when the water's there (as marshes usually can be), then it'll be a damn sight easier when the marsh is drained. How do we know if an Egyptian reed marsh is even remotely like a western European boggy marsh?

Now, all that being said, Professor Bob Brier, an egyptologist, believes there was a mistranslation and it most likely meant Moses, on foot, was able to part the reeds in the Delta region while pharaoh unsuccessfully tried to navigate through them with chariots. Chariots sink in the mud and Moses escapes.
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#20
Actually, there is the idea, reinforced by archaological finds on Santorini, that the volcano it self wiped out Atlantis, and the tsunami which is being discussed did all the other things. Santorini = Atlantis.
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#21
Quote:Hi Ah, but I learnt at a young age that miracles need not be inexplainable events, the miracle is in the timing of the event.

I have personal and anecdotal experience of several from around christmas a few years ago......
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#22
Quote:Was Exodus written 400-300 BC or AD? Either way it seems very young, or does that allow for earlier writing being present and only taking a final shape at that time?
Straight to the heart of the problem - there are indeed older parts in the Exodus, and earlier compositional strata. The problem is known as the Documentary Hypothesis (although it is, after more than a century of diligent study, hardly hypothetical). The Wiki-article is outdated and too optimistic about what can be known, but still useful if you accept that the J/E-part is now contested. In our particular case, the following conclusions appear to be more or less correct.

(1)
The topographical names of the Exodus story make no sense. During the last decades, most of them have been identified (see this book by Herbert Verreth for the most recent overview). If you follow Moses' route, he first turns south and continues to the south, and then he is suddenly back at his starting point and moves to the north. After that, he is in the south again, continues to the southeast, and then he is in the north again, and continues to the northeast, where he reaches the sea. The obvious conclusion is that two itineraries have been integrated.

(2)
This can on numerous cases be corroborated. Take, for instance, Moses near the mountain. Is it called Horeb or Sinai? And how many people witness God? It is a remarkable text: now it is Moses alone, then it is the entire people, then it is repeated that it is Moses alone. Then, we read about tho otherwise unknown "elders". Again, watch the movements by Moses: he goes up the mountain, and then he goes up the mountain - although we have not heard that he went back. Etc. Again: two sources (perhaps more).

(3)
The age of the two sources for the Exodus story can be derived from several aspects, including the toponyms (Herbert Verreth again). The story of the passage through the sea is in the youngest part.

(4)
Dating this source is difficult, although it must be pre-330 BC, because the Torah is (in main outline) accepted by the Samaritans, and the schism took place in 330. One theory, which I personally find convincing, is that this youngest source, which focuses very much on the cult in Jerusalem, was written at an age in which priests were in charge of Judah - i.e., after the Babylonian exile, during/after the reforms of Ezra. That brings us to a moment after 450.

(5)
The documentary hypothesis (i.e., the idea that the Torah has several sources) can be tested. For example, the idea that there is a young text that can be detected by its toponyms, is corroborated by the fact that in the chapters identified as belonging to this source, we also see an interest in the Jerusalem cult; a certain vocabulary that is absent elsewhere, etc. That does not mean that all scholars agree. (As I said, the Wiki is too optimistic in its presentation of the debate.)

(6)
The following, fascinating hypothesis can not be tested, but is worth a thought. In 351, the Persians tried to reconquer Egypt, which had been lost since 404. They were defeated by Nectanebo II at precisely the point where Moses went through the waves. It would be a nice piece of irony by the composer of this part of Exodus to turn the tables, and present the place where Egypt won its last victory as the site of Egypt's greatest defeat.

This can not be proved, but note that irony is almost everywhere in the Bible; take, for instance the story of the Tower of Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar had boasted that at the construction site, all languages of the world were spoken, and presents this as a symbol of his power. The author of the Bible picks up the boast, and even quotes another boast ("the tower will reach into heaven"), but turns the story into one about human pride that is punished by the creation of all languages.

(7)
I think that the Bible should in the first place be read as literature, as an important source about how people, long time ago, thought about important questions that we still discuss today. One does not have to be Jewish or Christian to read the Torah. In fact, most believers will gladly accept suggestions on the interpretation of the Bible by non-believers.

What I find unacceptable is believers who, because a scholar is not a believer, do not listen to his theories. This is what happened to one of the best books on the Jewish Bible, by a Dutch journalist, Marcel Hulspas ("En de zee spleet in tweeen...). He has jokingly been called "a professional atheist", but his book is, although difficult to read, superior to anything else on this subject. I have seen reviews which dismissed it because, as a non-believer, he was prejudiced and arrived on conclusions too soon. Few of his reviewers will have studied the Bible as much as Hulspas, who devoted eight years to his book. (That believe itself is also some sort of prejudice, is a point I will not digress upon, because the word "prejudice" is too negative.)
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#23
Quote:
Vortigern Studies:2yoc1ri5 Wrote:The question was about the route of a mass of people running from a mad bad king - you just dont take a route across a marsh or a tidal zone. :wink: And if they stayed clear of either, any tsunami would not have cleared a dry path for them. So either you go for the tsunami but you end up with an imposssible route, or you go for the 'acceptable rout'but then the tsunami does not affect anyone.
Ummm.... so you lead them to the big impassable and very deep Red Sea instead? Now that's reeeaaaallllllyyyyy dumb. Also, they didn't know a tsunami's about to hit; Moses didn't have a subscription to New Scientist. They saw the waters draw back. Now what would that suggest to a deeply religious man in those times? God saying "Go for it, boy, go for it!" perhaps?
Scoff all you want, but what´s your alternative= There are miles and miles of dry land between red Sea and Mediterranean. So whu are they still crossing water anyway? Ever thought of that? Or what body of water they are supposed to cross? The Red Sea is of course your alternative, not mine.
Also, a tsunami is not my explanation of the events, which I see as a foundation myth anyway. So don´t make me explain events as if they happened for real in every detail. Big Grin

So how far is that tsunami supposed to have struck inland anyway? Ten miles? Further? If not, that really limits your itenerary for the exodus.

Quote:
Vortigern Studies:2yoc1ri5 Wrote:Even with the 'water away from the marsh', it's still a vast stretch of sogging mud. No Moses with abit of a brain would lead his people through thát!
You know it was impassable how?
Well... Marshy land, flooded by enough water to see it draw back, reeds growing en masse... I would say that the bottom would not be nice strong stuff, but instead, like every terrain I just described, a pathless mass of mud, roots and plants.
That, or they crossed over it on causeways?

Quote:And I come back to my point about the uselessness of leading them to a much larger body of completely un-wade-able sea.
Yes, your point, not my suggestion. :wink:


Quote:It may have been hard going, but if a marsh can be waded through when the water's there (as marshes usually can be), then it'll be a damn sight easier when the marsh is drained. How do we know if an Egyptian reed marsh is even remotely like a western European boggy marsh?
If you drain a marsh it takes a bit to dry out. Like days or weeks. Big Grin
Why should Egyptian reed marshes be different from reed marshes elsewehere?

Quote:Now, all that being said, Professor Bob Brier, an egyptologist, believes there was a mistranslation and it most likely meant Moses, on foot, was able to part the reeds in the Delta region while pharaoh unsuccessfully tried to navigate through them with chariots. Chariots sink in the mud and Moses escapes.
Yeah, well, chariots are drawn by horses who generally get quicker through mud that people on foot. But maybe those causeways...? Big Grin
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#24
We're never gonna agree on this, especially the bit about heavy wheeled chariots getting through faster than people because horses can. :wink: I can't see the logic in your arguments, and you can't see any in mine Big Grin
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#25
Looks like it, plus we´re getting wayyyy OT. Big Grin
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply
#26
Big waves......
Visne partem mei capere? Comminus agamus! * Me semper rogo, Quid faceret Iulius Caesar? * Confidence is a good thing! Overconfidence is too much of a good thing.
[b]Legio XIIII GMV. (Q. Magivs)RMRS Remember Atuatuca! Vengence will be ours!
Titus Flavius Germanus
Batavian Coh I
Byron Angel
Reply
#27
Since no one has bothered to quote Plato's recount of the Atlantis story, here goes :

"Now in this island of Atlantis there was a great and wonderful empire which had rule over the whole island and several others, and over parts of the continent . . . But, there occurred violent earthquakes and floods, and in a single day and night of misfortune. . . the island of Atlantis . . .disappeared in the depths of the sea."

At face value, needless to say, this account sounds like strong support for the eruption theory.

Quote:Thanks for the lecture, but I know.. I probably see the same documentaries as you do Big Grin
Speaking of documentaries, have any of you seen "The Exodus Decoded" ? The program was aired in 2006 on the UK Discovery Channel. It was produced by James Cameron and written by Simcha Jacobovici (from the History Channel). It compares the hypothetical eruption that caused the sea / marsh to recede in Moses' time to the modern eruption in Cameroon. Many parallels between the two events are made evident and help give scientific explanations for the ten plagues that ravaged Egypt. This was a high budget documentary which used a lot of CGI.

Quote:What I find unacceptable is believers who, because a scholar is not a believer, do not listen to his theories.
Why ?

Would you object to :
  • a science teacher who did not believe in science ?

  • a marxist teaching capitalism ?

  • an anarchist teaching about representative democracy ?

  • a medical professor who didn't believe in medicine ?
If so, then why have any standards ?

If not, then why hold biblical archeology to a different standard ?

Heinrich Schliemann believed in Troy's existence when most men still thought it to be a mere myth.

Believers have the advantage of making allowances for allegorical literature. Non-believers would not tend to be so open-minded or have the same spirit of adventure (as evidenced by Schliemann), IMO. So, it that sense, believers make better risk-takers.

Therefore, the motives, theories and conclusions of non-believers are understandably, IMO, subject to greater suspicion and scrutiny. Of course, they can and do make great contributions in discovering new evidence.

That's my take, anyway.

~Theo
Jaime
Reply
#28
Quote:Would you object to :
  • a science teacher who did not believe in science ?
  • a marxist teaching capitalism ?
  • an anarchist teaching about representative democracy ?
  • a medical professor who didn't believe in medicine ?
Yes, of course; that they are critical does not mean that they are talking nonsense. Marx has said a lot of interesting things about capitalism, which have become mainstream economic theory.

Quote:Believers have the advantage of making allowances for allegorical literature. Non-believers would not tend to be so open-minded or have the same spirit of adventure
That's too simple, in my opinion. It was believers like Robinson and Albright who went digging in the biblical soil, because they took it litterally and ignored that many lines had to be read metaphorically (e.g., the falling of the Jericho walls is probably best read as a first-fruit; it can by no means be a historical event). It was litteralists like James Irwin who believe there is really an Ark of Noah in the mountains.

I hope that, when you wrote "allegories", you meant "metaphors". Allegories (=an interpretation of a text that the author did not intend) are a Greek invention, not present in the Bible, although Christians have tendency to read the Bible metaphorically. I will not object; if they present the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 as an allegorical prefiguration of Christ, that's their right. But they can not claim that this is a scholarly statement. (What Isaiah did have in mind, is another question.) To put it bluntly: there is no room for allegory in a scholarly debate, because the Jewish Bible is not a Greek text.

As far as metaphors are concerned, scholars -I am not talking about believers- have to read the Bible like any other ancient document: it contains poetry that is related to that of the ancient Near East, it contains myths that belong to the Near Eastern family, and it contains historical sections that have to be read like any other ancient Near Eastern chronicle. You just cannot read the Jewish Bible without studying the ancient Near East. If there is a difference, it has something to do with literary quality; the book of Samuel is nice to read, something you can not maintain of the Babylonian chronicles.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#29
Avete,

In case someone hasn't seen the "Exodus Decoded" you can watch the whole thing online - it's over 90 minutes.

Here's the direct link.

To see the highlights, you can drag the slider to "28:00" to see when he starts talking about the Santorini Eruption and you can skip to "52:00" when he starts talking about the actual parting of the Reed Sea (which is actually an extinct lake today due to the Suez Canal).

About the pillars of smoke and fire, he has a different interpretation. You'll see for yourselves if you skip to "52:00" and watch for about 20 minutes.

Quote:
Theodosius the Great:kat8oxss Wrote:Theodosius the Great wrote:
Would you object to :


a science teacher who did not believe in science ?

a marxist teaching capitalism ?

an anarchist teaching about representative democracy ?

a medical professor who didn't believe in medicine ?
Yes, of course; that they are critical does not mean that they are talking nonsense. Marx has said a lot of interesting things about capitalism, which have become mainstream economic theory.
I admit it's possible to put aside one's biases and teach the subject straight but I'm not so trusting. Most people in my opinion and experience lack such integrity.

Quote:That's too simple, in my opinion. It was believers like Robinson and Albright who went digging in the biblical soil, because they took it litterally and ignored that many lines had to be read metaphorically
Admittedly there are some biblical absolutists but they are a small minority, IMO. Among non-believers, I believe the majority of them are more susceptible to making fallacious conclusions like the old "absence of evidence is evidence of absence". Just because Sodom and Gommorah haven't yet been discovered doesn't mean they did not exist, IMO. Ditto for the five cities of Philistia.

Quote:As far as metaphors are concerned, scholars -I am not talking about believers- have to read the Bible like any other ancient document: it contains poetry that is related to that of the ancient Near East, it contains myths that belong to the Near Eastern family, and it contains historical sections that have to be read like any other ancient Near Eastern chronicle.
No disagreement there Smile . But if and when the Ark of Noah, Atlantis, or the Ark of the Covenant are found, it will have been achieved by believers in all likelihood.

Thanks for elaborating your position. I can see more clearly where you're coming from, Jona.

~Theo
Jaime
Reply
#30
Quote:Heinrich Schliemann believed in Troy's existence when most men still thought it to be a mere myth.
Indeed, we have his beliefs to thank for the discovery of Troy, when all the world laughed at him.

But Jona is correct too, believers often deny other possibilities: Schliemann was so convinced of how Troy 'should' look, he failed to see what he had found and continued to dig into the hill until he found 'his' Troy, thereby almost completely destroying the citadel of what was Homer's Troy... Cry
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Inventory of the entire body of ancient literature Eleatic Guest 6 2,061 08-02-2020, 03:59 PM
Last Post: Robert Vermaat
  The survival rate of ancient literature Sean Manning 53 19,245 02-16-2009, 03:25 PM
Last Post: Restitvtvs

Forum Jump: