Post by LIT on May 1, 2015 19:39:02 GMT
The ancient city Pompeii wasn't destroyed in 79 AD by Vesuvius, but in the Middle Ages
source:The ancient city Pompeii wasn't destroyed in 79 AD by Vesuvius, but in the Middle Ages
The ancient city Pompeii wasn't destroyed in 79 AD by Vesuvius, but in the Middle Ages
It is quite surprising that the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum was unanimously chosen by historians to have occurred in 79 AD.
The so-called evidence confirming the event and providing a time frame comes from Pliny the Younger, whose uncle, Pliny the Elder, supposedly died in the volcano eruption.
Pliny the Younger was only 17-18 years old when Pompeii was destroyed. Basically, solely based on his account the historians have decided to put the destruction of Pompeii in 79 AD assuming Pliny the Younger was an author of "Ancient Rome". I should note that he wasn't a direct witness as he didn't go on a rescue mission to Pompeii but his uncle, the famous historian Pliny the Elder.
Strangely enough, the city of Pompeii wasn't unearthed till the 18th century. Quite a long time for a city of 20,000 to be rediscovered. How is it possible that such a catastrophic event remained unnoticed? How could the city remain buried for 17-18 centuries? No one even bothered to look for it. This doesn't make sense.
What is even more interesting is that his letters in which he talks about Pompeii appear sometime in the 16th century.
Quite easily they could have been written in that period instead of in antiquity.
Thus Pompeii could have been destroyed in the 14-16th century and that is why it was dug out only in the 17-18 century and not in 79AD.
The whole idea about it being an ancient city could be based on a series of wrong assumptions and falsifications.
Take a look at the picture below from wikipedia (Portrait of the baker Terentius Neo with his wife found on the wall of a Pompeii house)
Bakers and ordinary people had portraits hanging in their homes 2000 years ago
Very interesting story indeed.
And some replies to asked questions:
Interesting thoughts.
Forbidden Archeology!
Quoting: abhie
There could be a greater conspiracy behind this! I am not sure why this was needed but to me it is obvious the whole story is totally made up.
The destruction indeed occurred but its dating is totally off.
In addition, the evidence and the account given by Pliny the Younger appears in the 16th century when his letters are published (and he was an Ancient Rome author supposedly).
His letters containing the story of Pompeii and the city itself remain buried for at least 15 centuries before anyone bothers to look for the city, which wasn't a small ancient city, supposedly it had around 20,000 people population!!!!
In fact, this is huge!
How could the destruction of such a big ancient city go unnoticed by the other writers of the time? As if it didn't occur at all.
So you think they are right? Okay, your call...
If you really cared you would have checked first that manuscripts are not usually carbon dated, but are dated based on thorough studying of the style of writing, which, of course, could be erroneous, as it is based on preliminary set standards and is quite subjective.
Furthermore, As I said earlier, there is no way to know with certainty which of the many Vesuvius eruptions really caused Pompeii's destruction! It is only because of Pliny the Younger's account ( a Roman author) that we assume Pompeii was destroyed during his time.
No one however has ever questioned the reality of his very existence.
It is ridiculous that people have doubts Jesus was a real person, but believe readily Pliny the Younger (b. 61AD - d. 112AD) in fact lived and wrote the so-called letters in which this story about Pompeii is briefly mentioned.
Considering the letters appeared sometime in the 15th-16th century, it is very reasonable to question if they indeed belong to the 1st century.
Additionally, I don't know of any other author mentioning Pompeii in any respect in antiquity.
They dated everything from the brick work, the artefacts found and even the irrigation system! That's right, they were one f the first places to have a pipelined running water system!
The system was setup through a series of lead pipes, they didn't get poisoned however, due to the minerals in the water creating a thick layer of limescale around the inside of the piping, these pipes were also tested. They're still active and you can drink it as you walk round if you wish.
Quoting: El_Duderino
And this is not suspicious to you? A city seemingly flourishing disappears in a violent volcanic eruption. A city of 20,000 people gets covered with ash and lava! No one bothers to mention it besides our friend Pliny the Younger, who was btw only 17 yo when it happened. He wrote about it supposedly 25 years after the fact in one of his letters as if not a big deal.
How many ancient cities had 20,000 people population in 79AD? This would have been a huge catastrophe if it really occurred in the 1st century. Waiting for 17 centuries to re-discover it is quite absurd. By the way, the things you mention make me even more convinced that it wasn't an ancient city but most likely a Middle Ages city.
This Pompeii the way you're describing it seems to be the most developed city in the 1st century
Not everything is a hoax, but if you can't be sure of something why believing in it so stubbornly? I am in fact quite shocked historians don't questions such things and just buy the nonsense they were taught and read somewhere based on sources from the late Renaissance.
Haven't you wondered how much information we have about the Ancient Rome, including full names, biographies, portraits, statues, details, dates of birth etc. If you care reading more about this you will be surprised that it all got re-discovered in the Renaissance. Was it discovered or was it written then? That is the question.
We're led to believe that the Roman civilization was a mighty, relatively densely populated empire with huge cities like Rome believed to have been around 1 million in the 1st century! A civilization with huge influence all over Europe, and obviously quite developed even technologically, and yet it was reduced to nothing by barbarians and forgotten till the 15th century? I don't think the empire itself is a hoax, but seriously doubt its dating and chronology. Also, it is possible that the center of the empire was not in Italy but in Turkey (i.e. Constantinople).
source:The ancient city Pompeii wasn't destroyed in 79 AD by Vesuvius, but in the Middle Ages
The ancient city Pompeii wasn't destroyed in 79 AD by Vesuvius, but in the Middle Ages
It is quite surprising that the destruction of Pompeii and Herculaneum was unanimously chosen by historians to have occurred in 79 AD.
The so-called evidence confirming the event and providing a time frame comes from Pliny the Younger, whose uncle, Pliny the Elder, supposedly died in the volcano eruption.
Pliny the Younger was only 17-18 years old when Pompeii was destroyed. Basically, solely based on his account the historians have decided to put the destruction of Pompeii in 79 AD assuming Pliny the Younger was an author of "Ancient Rome". I should note that he wasn't a direct witness as he didn't go on a rescue mission to Pompeii but his uncle, the famous historian Pliny the Elder.
Strangely enough, the city of Pompeii wasn't unearthed till the 18th century. Quite a long time for a city of 20,000 to be rediscovered. How is it possible that such a catastrophic event remained unnoticed? How could the city remain buried for 17-18 centuries? No one even bothered to look for it. This doesn't make sense.
What is even more interesting is that his letters in which he talks about Pompeii appear sometime in the 16th century.
Quite easily they could have been written in that period instead of in antiquity.
Thus Pompeii could have been destroyed in the 14-16th century and that is why it was dug out only in the 17-18 century and not in 79AD.
The whole idea about it being an ancient city could be based on a series of wrong assumptions and falsifications.
Take a look at the picture below from wikipedia (Portrait of the baker Terentius Neo with his wife found on the wall of a Pompeii house)
Bakers and ordinary people had portraits hanging in their homes 2000 years ago
Very interesting story indeed.And some replies to asked questions:
Interesting thoughts.
Forbidden Archeology!
Quoting: abhie
There could be a greater conspiracy behind this! I am not sure why this was needed but to me it is obvious the whole story is totally made up.
The destruction indeed occurred but its dating is totally off.
In addition, the evidence and the account given by Pliny the Younger appears in the 16th century when his letters are published (and he was an Ancient Rome author supposedly).
His letters containing the story of Pompeii and the city itself remain buried for at least 15 centuries before anyone bothers to look for the city, which wasn't a small ancient city, supposedly it had around 20,000 people population!!!!
In fact, this is huge!
How could the destruction of such a big ancient city go unnoticed by the other writers of the time? As if it didn't occur at all.
And the geological evidence of a volcanic eruption at the that time is what?
Do you know how long the Sphinx lay buried before discovery? Thousands of years...
Quoting: davvi
I am sorry to break it but there is no way to date a volcanic eruption to a particular year!
It is not a comet or a star which has a trajectory and could be measured.
The volcanologists can only study the size of the caldera, the size of the eruption etc but can't date a particular eruption and put it in a specific year with certainty.
They could also count how many eruptions have occurred throughout the millennium and so on.
Additionally, Vesuvius has erupted numerous times. There is no way to prove which particular eruption really destroyed Pompeii!
I am just presenting the evidence which is vague. A year was chosen - 79 AD, totally based on Pliny the Younger's account which dates from the 16th century (when his letters appear in published form).
As for the Sphinx, did you know how long the Sphinx lay buried before being discovered? I don't know. Its dating is another mystification as well. Even if it appears to be really old, it really cannot be proven how old it is.
Do you know how long the Sphinx lay buried before discovery? Thousands of years...
Quoting: davvi
I am sorry to break it but there is no way to date a volcanic eruption to a particular year!
It is not a comet or a star which has a trajectory and could be measured.
The volcanologists can only study the size of the caldera, the size of the eruption etc but can't date a particular eruption and put it in a specific year with certainty.
They could also count how many eruptions have occurred throughout the millennium and so on.
Additionally, Vesuvius has erupted numerous times. There is no way to prove which particular eruption really destroyed Pompeii!
I am just presenting the evidence which is vague. A year was chosen - 79 AD, totally based on Pliny the Younger's account which dates from the 16th century (when his letters appear in published form).
As for the Sphinx, did you know how long the Sphinx lay buried before being discovered? I don't know. Its dating is another mystification as well. Even if it appears to be really old, it really cannot be proven how old it is.
"The largest body of Pliny's work which survives is his Epistulae (Letters), a series of personal missives directed to his friends and associates. These letters are a unique testimony of Roman administrative history and everyday life in the 1st century AD. Especially noteworthy among the letters are two in which he describes the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in August 79, during which his uncle Pliny the Elder died (Epistulae VI.16, VI.20), and one in which he asks the Emperor for instructions regarding official policy concerning Christians (Epistulae X.96)."
"In France Giovanni Giocondo discovered a manuscript of Pliny the Younger's letters containing his correspondence with Trajan. He published it in Paris dedicating the work to Louis XII. Two Italian editions of Pliny's Epistles were published by Giocondo, one printed in Bologna in 1498 and one from the press of Aldus Manutius in 1508.[22]"
"In France Giovanni Giocondo discovered a manuscript of Pliny the Younger's letters containing his correspondence with Trajan. He published it in Paris dedicating the work to Louis XII. Two Italian editions of Pliny's Epistles were published by Giocondo, one printed in Bologna in 1498 and one from the press of Aldus Manutius in 1508.[22]"
so for challenging your delusions I get a red?
continue the conversation something tells me it will be a short one...
Quoting: davvi
What do you mean you get a red? By the way, if you show me any other ancient sources mentioning Pompeii besides Pliny the Younger's letters, I might start getting convinced that it indeed occurred in antiquity.
It is completely absurd to believe in a story that appears in only one source which dates from the 15-16th century! At least that is when it was published for the first time and we don't have the originals!
We don't have any evidence Pliny the Younger was really an ancient author.
Show me some evidence please. I would like to see it. Also please find me some sources before the 15-16th century mentioning Pompeii in any way.
continue the conversation something tells me it will be a short one...
Quoting: davvi
What do you mean you get a red? By the way, if you show me any other ancient sources mentioning Pompeii besides Pliny the Younger's letters, I might start getting convinced that it indeed occurred in antiquity.
It is completely absurd to believe in a story that appears in only one source which dates from the 15-16th century! At least that is when it was published for the first time and we don't have the originals!
We don't have any evidence Pliny the Younger was really an ancient author.
Show me some evidence please. I would like to see it. Also please find me some sources before the 15-16th century mentioning Pompeii in any way.
So you think they are right? Okay, your call...
If you really cared you would have checked first that manuscripts are not usually carbon dated, but are dated based on thorough studying of the style of writing, which, of course, could be erroneous, as it is based on preliminary set standards and is quite subjective.
Furthermore, As I said earlier, there is no way to know with certainty which of the many Vesuvius eruptions really caused Pompeii's destruction! It is only because of Pliny the Younger's account ( a Roman author) that we assume Pompeii was destroyed during his time.
No one however has ever questioned the reality of his very existence.
It is ridiculous that people have doubts Jesus was a real person, but believe readily Pliny the Younger (b. 61AD - d. 112AD) in fact lived and wrote the so-called letters in which this story about Pompeii is briefly mentioned.
Considering the letters appeared sometime in the 15th-16th century, it is very reasonable to question if they indeed belong to the 1st century.
Additionally, I don't know of any other author mentioning Pompeii in any respect in antiquity.
They dated everything from the brick work, the artefacts found and even the irrigation system! That's right, they were one f the first places to have a pipelined running water system!
The system was setup through a series of lead pipes, they didn't get poisoned however, due to the minerals in the water creating a thick layer of limescale around the inside of the piping, these pipes were also tested. They're still active and you can drink it as you walk round if you wish.
Quoting: El_Duderino
And this is not suspicious to you? A city seemingly flourishing disappears in a violent volcanic eruption. A city of 20,000 people gets covered with ash and lava! No one bothers to mention it besides our friend Pliny the Younger, who was btw only 17 yo when it happened. He wrote about it supposedly 25 years after the fact in one of his letters as if not a big deal.
How many ancient cities had 20,000 people population in 79AD? This would have been a huge catastrophe if it really occurred in the 1st century. Waiting for 17 centuries to re-discover it is quite absurd. By the way, the things you mention make me even more convinced that it wasn't an ancient city but most likely a Middle Ages city.
This Pompeii the way you're describing it seems to be the most developed city in the 1st century
Not everything is a hoax, but if you can't be sure of something why believing in it so stubbornly? I am in fact quite shocked historians don't questions such things and just buy the nonsense they were taught and read somewhere based on sources from the late Renaissance.
Haven't you wondered how much information we have about the Ancient Rome, including full names, biographies, portraits, statues, details, dates of birth etc. If you care reading more about this you will be surprised that it all got re-discovered in the Renaissance. Was it discovered or was it written then? That is the question.
We're led to believe that the Roman civilization was a mighty, relatively densely populated empire with huge cities like Rome believed to have been around 1 million in the 1st century! A civilization with huge influence all over Europe, and obviously quite developed even technologically, and yet it was reduced to nothing by barbarians and forgotten till the 15th century? I don't think the empire itself is a hoax, but seriously doubt its dating and chronology. Also, it is possible that the center of the empire was not in Italy but in Turkey (i.e. Constantinople).
