Alternate Ancient Colonies

File the Old Testament under propaganda or foundation mythology please, not under history.

Can you think of many times when pastoral nomads, when invading, didn't tend to cause a lot of mayhem? It generally takes a long time for them to assimilate and sedentarize, and only when they aren't a large proportion of the population.
 

Cook

Banned
Can you think of many times when pastoral nomads, when invading, didn't tend to cause a lot of mayhem? It generally takes a long time for them to assimilate and sedentarize, and only when they aren't a large proportion of the population.

The Old Testament is not a reliable source of historical information regarding the geographical origins, movements, relationships or lifestyles of tribes, linguistic groups, kingdoms or religions for that matter.
 
The Old Testament is not a reliable source of historical information regarding the geographical origins, movements, relationships or lifestyles of tribes, linguistic groups, kingdoms or religions for that matter.

Yes, but there is some historical corroboration from other sources, like Egyptian records and archaeology.
 
Of what?

Please don’t say Exodus.

Of course Exodus. The Ten Plagues and the parting of the Red Sea are proven historical facts. Also, it's well known through the study of dental records that Jews at that time lived much longer than they do now, so it's very plausible that Moses lived to be 120.
 
While many do not interpret the Book of Joshua literally, I'm fairly certain that astronomers have discovered a "gap" in the astroarchaeological record for a day at about the time Joshua and the twelve tribes of Israel invaded Canaan.

You don't want to call the Bible the inerrant Word of God? Fine. But whether you like it or not, none of the history in it has ever been disproven.
 
And lo, it came to pass, that they saw the thread and truly, it had been jacked...

Srsly though, whether you're pro or anti religion or whatever, the Hebrew writings weren't just composed in a vacuum. They came out of a historical context and the experiences of a people. (Or depending on your point of view, one faction of that people.) To dismiss a document like that as useless to the historian sounds to me like an attempt to be needlessly edgy...
 
Last edited:

Cook

Banned
Of course Exodus. The Ten Plagues and the parting of the Red Sea are proven historical facts. Also, it's well known through the study of dental records that Jews at that time lived much longer than they do now, so it's very plausible that Moses lived to be 120.

You need to up your medication.
 
I thought the Hebrews laced the water supply with a hallucinogen. God had instructed them to lace both their own and their enemies' water. At first, they refrained from giving the hallucinogen to their enemies and God was angry. God was merciful and gave them another chance. After their victory, God told the Hebrews that because they had not listened the first time, they'd be cursed with pale skin for a myriad of years.
 
You need to up your medication.

While using a snide ad hominem against an argumentum ab religione may work where you are from, we prefer reasoned arguments backed with textual evidence from the Scriptures here.

Also your font is cool and different and sets you apart from other posters.
 
You need to up your medication.

So then you deny that science proves that the Flood really happened? What's the point of this thread if you don't even know basic facts about the subject being discussed? Next you'll be telling me that archaeology lies and that God didn't bring down the walls of Jericho. :rolleyes:
 
That said, I liked the earlier posts about a Grecian penetration into Russia. I wonder if the climate and/or inhabitants might be too inhospitable for such an advance up the river valleys to occur.

I can't recall any Grecian colonies along the Upper Adriatic coast...could the Illyrians have been displaced or sidelined by a Grecian colony in the Dalmatian littoral or in the general region of Venice?
 
[That said, I liked the earlier posts about a Grecian penetration into Russia. I wonder if the climate and/or inhabitants might be too inhospitable for such an advance up the river valleys to occur.

I can't recall any Grecian colonies along the Upper Adriatic coast...could the Illyrians have been displaced or sidelined by a Grecian colony in the Dalmatian littoral or in the general region of Venice?

There are only so many Greeks - I'm not sure how far you're really going to see colonization.

I suppose advances up river valleys are possible, but you'd have to ask what the point would be. As it was, there were weird and interesting colonies at the mouths of the Black Sea rivers and the Crimea. In OTL colonies reached up to Albania, but you'd have to ask the why question again for going further up.
 

Cook

Banned
I suppose advances up river valleys are possible, but you'd have to ask what the point would be.

The Vikings established trad routes and colonies along the major rivers of Russia and entered the Black Sea using this method so it’s entirely feasible.
 

Cook

Banned
Could we get Mediterranean colonies on the east coast of Africa beyond the Red Sea and Punt? Or would the monsoons be too much for ships back then to navigate reliably?

Or maritime trade routes from the Red Sea past Oman to the Kingdoms of India and Sri Lanka?
 
The Vikings established trad routes and colonies along the major rivers of Russia and entered the Black Sea using this method so it’s entirely feasible.

Did I say it wasn't feasible? I asked what the point was. The Rus came down to the Black Sea in search of Greek goods. The Greeks only needed to be at the mouths of the rivers to receive everything to be gotten from the North.
 

Cook

Banned
Did I say it wasn't feasible? I asked what the point was. The Rus came down to the Black Sea in search of Greek goods. The Greeks only needed to be at the mouths of the rivers to receive everything to be gotten from the North.

Perhaps they want to cut out the middle man.

I dunno, I’m still trying to put a Pyramid in the Simpson Desert.
:p
 
Did I say it wasn't feasible? I asked what the point was. The Rus came down to the Black Sea in search of Greek goods. The Greeks only needed to be at the mouths of the rivers to receive everything to be gotten from the North.

The only reason I've come up with so far is that some Bosporan tyrant decides to conquer as much as he can.

Or maybe a Scythian king conquers the Bosporan Kingdom, but is impressed by Greek culture and decides to appoint Greeks to high positions in his kingdom. Eventually, we get some sort of Greco-Scythian culture. I don't think it's too much of a stretch if we invent a philhellenic Scythian leader...
 
Last edited:
Top