Date: Thu, 06 Jun 1996 14:08:46 -0400
To: Athena Discuss 
Subject: Re: questions of origin

David Meadows wrote:
> 
> At 22:02 6/5/96 -0400, S. Thomas wrote:
> >For me, the question of "influence" and what it means in this context
> >resolves fairly easily, and in a very common-sense way.  I don't think
> >there is any cause to agonize over it.  I had the experience of visiting
> >Egypt and Greece both, on the same trip.  Mere days after having stood
> >surrounded by the massive stone columns at Karnak temple, I stood
> >surrounded by those at the Acropolis in Greece.  If you would do the same,
> >I think any question of "influence" would rather quickly resolve itself.
> >The Greeks copied from the Egyptians.  Independent reinvention is simply
> >not credible as a hypothesis.
> 
> How very Herodotus-like of you ST! Relying on autopsy is, of course, the
> best way to `prove' the accuracy of your statement and it's also the best
> way to be misled. So tell me, suppose one day you were given the chance to
> stand atop the ziggurat at Ur and mere days later got to stand on a pyramid
> at Teotihuacan. Would you similarly so confidently assert that people from
> the Americas copied from the Near East? 

You may think so, but I cannot say, because I have been to neither.

> How many years lies between the
> temple of Karnak and the Acropolis? What were the temple of Karnak's
> antecedents? What is the history of the temple design which one sees in
> Greece? And if the Greeks are copying Egyptian forms of architecture (which
> they might well be doing), how did the ideas get from Egypt to Greece, and
> more importantly *when*?

Mere detail.  I notice that you do not attempt to contradict my 
view.  Could that be because I am right?

> Perhaps even better -- please tell us what the connections are between the
> two temples and please get beyond "well they both have columns".

Now you test my scholarship on a point that is a matter of direct
observation.  Since you are the classical scholar, and you have
at your disposal all the weapons to demolish my assertion should
it be untrue, why don't you edify me and all on this list by 
doing just that?  I would humbly stand corrected if I am
mistaken.  

> (your other points will be dealt with in due course)

More ex cathedra posturing, pure bluster, signifying nothing.

> dm

Regards,

Contents | Previous | Next