Bratot
Стоик и Машкртник!
- Член од
- 27 јануари 2007
- Мислења
- 17.089
- Поени од реакции
- 4.499
Според официјалната грчка веб страна за историско наследство го пишува следново:
Додека на слична веб страна Грците на големо го величаат и слават Андроникос и постојано се повторуваат во лагите:
Кога ќе ја земеме во предвид бројката на посетители и постојано наглас повторувана лага тогаш ни станува јасно на кој начин Грците си ги бранат своите позиции.
Но сепак, едно нешто се маркетинг пропагандите, а сосема друго археолошките истражувања и изјаснувањето на авторитетите во таа област.
Она што нам ни преостанува е да го правиме истото што и Грците, меѓутоа строго повикувајќи се на тие релевантни оценки од поголемите светски авторитети, доколку сакаме да бидеме порамноправни во борбата со грчката пропаганда.
За да ја разоткриеме грчката цел со овие фалсификувани наоди ќе се послужиме со една а-н-а-л-о-г-и-ј-а :
Истиот начин како Нацистичката Идеологија во Германија, го употребува и Грција.
Создава измислени артифакти и тврдења за постојано етничко присуство за да може да ги заснова своите територијални претензии.
Нормално како што е наведено во пасусот подвлечен подоле - тоа е глупост и ниту еден сериозен археолог денеска нема да поверува во такво нешто - затоа ќе ги разгледаме следните критики и разбивањето на грчките лаги.
Јуџин Борза:
Many European, Australian, and North American scholars, while applauding the importance of Andronikos's discoveries, have remained skeptical about Andronikos's identification of the deceased.
Manolis Andronikos, 1919-1992, by Eugene N. Borza © 1992 Archaeological Institute of America.
Одиме повторно со Борза:
"Regarding the paraphernalia we attribute to Alexander, no single item constitutes proof, but the quality of the argument increases with the quantity of information"
"We believe that it is likely that this material was Alexander's. As for the dating of the tombs themselves, this is virtually certain."
-Eugene N. Borza, professor emeritus of ancient history at Pennsylvania State University.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...der-great.html
"[Andronikos] presented his theories [that the tombs were those of Alexander's father and his family] with great skill, and the Greek nation responded with fervent enthusiasm," Borza said.
"Indeed I was one of those who, in two early articles in the late 1970s, accepted Andronikos' view that the remains were those of Philip II."
Borza started to doubt Andronikos' conclusions, however, as he studied the evidence.
He contacted Olga Palagia, an art historian at the University of Athens, to evaluate the tombs' construction, pottery, and paintings.
Soon the duo realized the significance of the fact that Tomb II and Tomb III were built using a curved ceilings called barrel vaults.
"The earliest securely dated barrel vault in Greece dates to the late 320s [B.C.], nearly a generation after the death of Philip II," Borza told National Geographic News.
Palagia also found that paintings on the exterior frieze of the tomb reflected themes that were likely from the age of Alexander the Great, rather than that of his father.
"Alexander the Great's "Crown," Shield Discovered?" Sara Goudarzi for National Geographic News, April 23, 2008
Specifically, Tomb II. While there is general agreement on its royal status, some scholars identify the buried male as Philip III Arrhidaeus, instead.
Значи Грците подметнуваат фалсификувани тврдења за гробот на Филип 2 за да додадат поголема вредност на наодите.
Се рабира сесрдна помош добиле од Британците во фалсификување на овие наоди:
In 274 B.C., when Antigonus Gonatas was King
of Macedonia, Pyrrhus, the King of Epirus, invaded Macedonia and arrived at Aeges(Vergina), where he pillaged all royal tombs and scattered the bones of all kings, among which
there were those of Philip II and his son's, Philip III Arrhidaeus'.
(Diodorus Siculus, Plutarch,Pausanias)
Professor Andronikos in his book refers to the pillaging of the royal tombs by Pyrrhus, but claims that “it was by mere coincidence that the tomb of King Philip II escaped from being pillaged”.
However, this tomb was well known to everyone
and would have been impossible for it to have
escaped, just like no other royal tomb in Vergina
escaped before 274 BC .
This view on which Professor Andronikos' final
conclusions on the identity of the dead and the
tombs of Vergina were based was, in my opinion,
a serious historical error of facts in the field of
archaeology.
Извор: A brief extract of evidence contained in the recently
published book The Royal Tomb II at Vergina Reveals
Alexander the Great by historian researcher
Triandafyllos D. Papazois
Целиот документ можете да го прочитате на
http://www.tdpapazois.gr/english_research.pdf
This error of facts was significantly reinforced by
the conclusions of a group of British scientists
under Anatomist Dr. J. Musgrave, who supported
in their report that “…they succeeded in restoring
the head of King Philip II based on the skull bones
discovered in Tomb II”
(Transactions of the International Congress of Classical Archaeology XII, Athens 4 10.9.1983).
Не последен но целосно доследен е коментарот на В.Линдзи Адамс:
"Indeed for most scholars working in fourth-century Macedonia, the original attribution by Andronikos now seems doubtful,"
- Winthrop Lindsay Adams, a professor of history at the University of Utah.
Додека на слична веб страна Грците на големо го величаат и слават Андроникос и постојано се повторуваат во лагите:
Кога ќе ја земеме во предвид бројката на посетители и постојано наглас повторувана лага тогаш ни станува јасно на кој начин Грците си ги бранат своите позиции.
Но сепак, едно нешто се маркетинг пропагандите, а сосема друго археолошките истражувања и изјаснувањето на авторитетите во таа област.
Она што нам ни преостанува е да го правиме истото што и Грците, меѓутоа строго повикувајќи се на тие релевантни оценки од поголемите светски авторитети, доколку сакаме да бидеме порамноправни во борбата со грчката пропаганда.
За да ја разоткриеме грчката цел со овие фалсификувани наоди ќе се послужиме со една а-н-а-л-о-г-и-ј-а :
Истиот начин како Нацистичката Идеологија во Германија, го употребува и Грција.
Создава измислени артифакти и тврдења за постојано етничко присуство за да може да ги заснова своите територијални претензии.
Нормално како што е наведено во пасусот подвлечен подоле - тоа е глупост и ниту еден сериозен археолог денеска нема да поверува во такво нешто - затоа ќе ги разгледаме следните критики и разбивањето на грчките лаги.
Јуџин Борза:
Many European, Australian, and North American scholars, while applauding the importance of Andronikos's discoveries, have remained skeptical about Andronikos's identification of the deceased.
Manolis Andronikos, 1919-1992, by Eugene N. Borza © 1992 Archaeological Institute of America.
Одиме повторно со Борза:
"Regarding the paraphernalia we attribute to Alexander, no single item constitutes proof, but the quality of the argument increases with the quantity of information"
"We believe that it is likely that this material was Alexander's. As for the dating of the tombs themselves, this is virtually certain."
-Eugene N. Borza, professor emeritus of ancient history at Pennsylvania State University.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...der-great.html
"[Andronikos] presented his theories [that the tombs were those of Alexander's father and his family] with great skill, and the Greek nation responded with fervent enthusiasm," Borza said.
"Indeed I was one of those who, in two early articles in the late 1970s, accepted Andronikos' view that the remains were those of Philip II."
Borza started to doubt Andronikos' conclusions, however, as he studied the evidence.
He contacted Olga Palagia, an art historian at the University of Athens, to evaluate the tombs' construction, pottery, and paintings.
Soon the duo realized the significance of the fact that Tomb II and Tomb III were built using a curved ceilings called barrel vaults.
"The earliest securely dated barrel vault in Greece dates to the late 320s [B.C.], nearly a generation after the death of Philip II," Borza told National Geographic News.
Palagia also found that paintings on the exterior frieze of the tomb reflected themes that were likely from the age of Alexander the Great, rather than that of his father.
"Alexander the Great's "Crown," Shield Discovered?" Sara Goudarzi for National Geographic News, April 23, 2008
Specifically, Tomb II. While there is general agreement on its royal status, some scholars identify the buried male as Philip III Arrhidaeus, instead.
Значи Грците подметнуваат фалсификувани тврдења за гробот на Филип 2 за да додадат поголема вредност на наодите.
Се рабира сесрдна помош добиле од Британците во фалсификување на овие наоди:
In 274 B.C., when Antigonus Gonatas was King
of Macedonia, Pyrrhus, the King of Epirus, invaded Macedonia and arrived at Aeges(Vergina), where he pillaged all royal tombs and scattered the bones of all kings, among which
there were those of Philip II and his son's, Philip III Arrhidaeus'.
(Diodorus Siculus, Plutarch,Pausanias)
Professor Andronikos in his book refers to the pillaging of the royal tombs by Pyrrhus, but claims that “it was by mere coincidence that the tomb of King Philip II escaped from being pillaged”.
However, this tomb was well known to everyone
and would have been impossible for it to have
escaped, just like no other royal tomb in Vergina
escaped before 274 BC .
This view on which Professor Andronikos' final
conclusions on the identity of the dead and the
tombs of Vergina were based was, in my opinion,
a serious historical error of facts in the field of
archaeology.
Извор: A brief extract of evidence contained in the recently
published book The Royal Tomb II at Vergina Reveals
Alexander the Great by historian researcher
Triandafyllos D. Papazois
Целиот документ можете да го прочитате на
http://www.tdpapazois.gr/english_research.pdf
This error of facts was significantly reinforced by
the conclusions of a group of British scientists
under Anatomist Dr. J. Musgrave, who supported
in their report that “…they succeeded in restoring
the head of King Philip II based on the skull bones
discovered in Tomb II”
(Transactions of the International Congress of Classical Archaeology XII, Athens 4 10.9.1983).
Не последен но целосно доследен е коментарот на В.Линдзи Адамс:
"Indeed for most scholars working in fourth-century Macedonia, the original attribution by Andronikos now seems doubtful,"
- Winthrop Lindsay Adams, a professor of history at the University of Utah.
