Tartessos? Help me defend Schulten's theories!

[Fiera]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
You really think so? [regarding the proportion of today scholar who support the theory of Tartessos being the byblical Tarsis]

Yes, I do. There s more than 0.1 %, at least if as much scholars as I believe still follow García Bellido today.

Again, I can translate and quote here García Bellido's article "Tartessós, leyenda, historia y misterio". There, he clearly poins out that he's more inclined to equate Tartessos and Tarsis than to place Tarsis anywhere else.

Oh please Fiera, that's clearly not enough. "Probably" suggests a somewhat high degree of certainty (at least in Spanish). I do not think Harlan was meaning that at all. The fair approach would have been "according to Greek classic texts", "legend suggests", "however archeological proof to back up those claims is still lacking", and sentences in the like.

A few words about this. The micropaedia is, as you probably already know, a very general reference and can only give brief and condensed definition and description. I'm quite sure that the use of "probably" has to do with this.

Furthermore, the only fact that "Tartessos" has been included in the micropaedia not regarded there as a legend or myth, it's a quite revealing feature for itself, assuming EB still bears its good reputation. At least that's what I thought

Please acknowledge that the passages you quoted suggest a degree of certainty that is far from reality.

I think I can't, since I've been arguing for the reality of that degree of certainty since the very beginning.

Sevilla is clearly Not Tartessos and that's what your quote says. It's bad cos it's false. That Seville was within the Tartessian ambit, fine, I agree. But that's not what the quote says.

Again, as far as I know, Seville has not been proved not to be Tartessos, which is what you're stating. Neither have Huelva, which is, together with Seville, the strongest "hypotheses" for today cities (again, read Blanco Freijeiro: "...Tartessos, que si en efecto existió y se hallaba a dos días de navegación de Cádiz, como indica Eforo, los mismo podía ser Huelva que Sevilla").

Uh, mathematical theorems? Historical knowledge? I do not follow your thoughts here.

Sorry, that's due to my lack of ability with English. I meant what I've said lots of times before: you seem to be asking for mathematical evidence for a field that doesn't rquire it. Even Aristitle said that the truth for mathemathics is not the same that the truth for Politics, or something of the sort.

yes it is, but I hope you understood my analogy

I did, it's only that we are arguing about so many things that I wanted to somehow "clean" the debate.

[Fiera]

Originally posted by alf
A ver Fiera... ojalá esté equivocado, pero me parece q empieza a haber aqui un poco de mal rollo... quizá me equivoque, aj alla.

No, no, te aseguro que por mi parte no hay mal rollo ninguno, sólo que este tema es interesante y me gusta discutirlo.

Y además, puede que expresándome en inglés resulte más seco y agresivo, no puedo evitarlo, pero aseguro que en esta discusión como en cualquier otra, yo sigo siendo el de siempre, y aunque nos llevemos la contraria, lo único que me dan es más ganas de conocernos y tomarnos esas cañas juntos.

Así que sí, acepto tu invitación y me planto en Bilbao en cuando pueda y los demás también.

Y espero que sepas cocinar como si fueras de una sociedad gastronómica!

[Fiera]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
I agree (again) with alf, it's not worth the effort to translate all that article. I do not have it with me but I have read it.

I sorry to go over this again, but if you've read it, I'm quite surprised you still address the whole existence of Tartessos matter as a legend or a myth.

But then again, perhaps each of us take his own conclussions from the same text.

It's interesting that I got dragged myself into a debate with three of the guys I most admire and respect in Apolyton (you, Harlan and Marquis). I have no interest at all to get into a 'bad rollo' with anybody and much less with any of you.

As Marquis said, there is no "bad rollo" anywhere, at least when it comes to me, and the only thing is there is is a quite interesting debate, as both you and me stated earlier, and I hope all of us can learn something new from it.

So let's summarize: some of you believe the 'legend' of Tartessos. Some of us don't. Let's get out for some birras!

I wish we actually could , but as I say, I see nothing bad about discusing this or that, that's what this place is for after all, isn't it?

[Jay Bee]

In the end we have been walking in circles, eh Juan? I mean we've come to the exact same place we were 7 months ago

If not for Civ2, I think this could be a very nice project for you to tackle for Civ3


BTW, What do you think about Hemeroskopeion (Denia?). Did it exist or not? Just kidding, just kidding

[Waku]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
If I am not mistaken, Schulten said among so many things that Tartessos was rich in ivory.....

I don't see your point here. If Hannibal managed to reach Rome through Iberia with lots of elephants is because there were elephants in the Maghreb.

Edit: That was so many posts ago that this post doesn't make any sense. This thread is growing very quickly.

[Fiera]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
In the end we have been walking in circles, eh Juan? I mean we've come to the exact same place we were 7 months ago

I know I've been, however I'm not quite sure what your stance about Tartessos was seven months ago. Hasn't it changed since, if only slightly?

If not for Civ2, I think this could be a very nice project for you to tackle for Civ3

Hmm, the bad thing about Tartessos is that, as far as we know, it didn't take part in important military conflict, except for the hypthetical clash with the Carthaginians, that I planned to depict in the Tratessos scn, but even in that case, we don't know much about the armies and ships of any of the sides.

However if Civ3, with its several wasy of achieving victory, offers another way of tackling the whole thing, I may give it a try, I don't know.

[Harlan]

The more I hear about this Schulten, the less I like. There was an "old school" of scientists who thought that anything great had to have come from the Near East. So everything advanced, including Mayan, Indian, etc had to come from them. Looks like Schulten is that way. Why couldn't the Tartessians be an indigenous culture? What possible evidence would connect them with the Etruscans?

Anways, Schulten aside, there is plenty of on the ground evidence to be fairly confident of a Tartessian kingdom. I agree completely with Marquis' analysis - given what we know from other places in the world with similar levels of development, it would be very surprising indeed if no central organized government arose there.

Jesus, do you still disagree with that, and why? That to me sounds like a very reasonable supposition, and a far cry from some of the more outlandish Tartessian claims that are made.

Also, what is your field of work, anyways? Any more thoughts on the Bible related stuff?

One problem with this thread is Fiera and Jesus are so busy writing here that neither can help me determine which cities actually existed in Iberia in 500 BC .

[Waku]

I'd like to add that according to the same logic applied to deny the existance of Tartessos, the Minoan civ did never exist, because in fact the term "Minoan" is only the name given today to the civ found in Crete, we don't know its name, Minoan seems to fit well.

Tartessos fits in the same terms with the ancient andalusian civ but we'll probably never know its real name. So if it's proven there was an advanced civ in Southern Spain I don't see why we can't use that name to refer to it.

[Jay Bee]

Originally posted by Waku
I don't see your point here. If Hannibal managed to reach Rome through Iberia with lots of elephants is because there were elephants in the Maghreb.

in the Mahgreb, not in Spain. The Mahgreb was probably very rich in ivory but I do not see how Tartessos could be. There were no elephants in Iberia at that time. The point is Schulten was wrong on this (too ). The reason why Schulten came up/adopted this idea is somewhat related to the Bible. Anyway, let's move on

[Waku]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
in the Mahgreb, not in Spain. The Mahgreb was probably very rich in ivory but I do not see how Tartessos could be. There were no elephants in Iberia at that time. The point is Schulten was wrong on this (too ). The reason why Schulten came up/adopted this idea is somewhat related to the Bible. Anyway, let's move on

is Holland rich in diamonds?

[Jay Bee]

Originally posted by Fiera

I'm not quite sure what your stance about Tartessos was seven months ago.

It is. Read again the thread (J/k). It's true however that I may mellowed a bit in this second part. That's because after so many months apssed I realized we were talking about two different things, the Tartessian cultural ambit, which I never denied (and is basically what Marquis has described in his very brilliant post) and the city of Tertessos, epicenter of a somewhat important Tartessian kingdom as described by Schulten (which I have always denied). Look at the title of this thread. We were supposed to debate about Schultenm weren't we?

Hasn't it changed since, if only slightly?

Yes, but see above why.

Hmm, the bad thing about Tartessos is that, as far as we know, it didn't take part in important military conflict, except for the hypthetical clash with the Carthaginians, that I planned to depict in the Tratessos scn, but even in that case, we don't know much about the armies and ships of any of the sides.

I always assumed this scenario would go the the Fantasy section of Bestonet, so why not do something akin to Kull's Odyssey? You now, Geryont's cattle, the pillars of Hercules (just kidding, just kidding)

However if Civ3, with its several wasy of achieving victory, offers another way of tackling the whole thing, I may give it a try, I don't know.

You should. Remember anything Guanche? It was in that direction

[Waku]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
You should. Remember anything Guanche? It was in that direction

That's what's really fantastic

[Harlan]

I can't say I know anything about it, but I would be surprised if there were no elephants in Iberia at that time. Reason I say this is because it is well known elephants, tigers and many other animals - heck, even hippos - were in ancient Greece around 500 BC. The climates were much different then, as Jesus acknoledges in his 216 BC scenario, covering most all of Iberia with forest. More important than climate change, people hadn't gotten around to wiping them out, which is what happened in Greece and other places not very long after.

By the way Jesus,
I asked you several questions in my last posting above. I'd still like to hear answers.

[Jay Bee]

The more I hear about this Schulten, the less I like.

I do not dislike Schulten, I swear. I do think we need people as corageous as him. It's important to put forward theories even if they are wrong cos they prompt us conduct more research in that area and re-examine old matters with new eyes (The scientist is speaking again, I think).

There was an "old school" of scientists who thought that anything great had to have come from the Near East. So everything advanced, including Mayan, Indian, etc had to come from them. Looks like Schulten is that way. Why couldn't the Tartessians be an indigenous culture?

Right on. Tartessos was an indigenous culture. I think Fiera agrees on that too. I don't think Schulten disagreed on that. To me Schulten was a precursor of Hollywood "historical" movies: action and fun above all.

What possible evidence would connect them with the Etruscans?

Did I talk about this? Schulten found pottery of Etruscan origin in Andalusia and speculated on the existence of close ties between Tartessians and Etruscans. The real explanation was that the Greek traders had brought those pieces to Spain.

Anways, Schulten aside, there is plenty of on the ground evidence to be fairly confident of a Tartessian kingdom. I agree completely with Marquis' analysis - given what we know from other places in the world with similar levels of development, it would be very surprising indeed if no central organized government arose there. Jesus, do you still disagree with that, and why? That to me sounds like a very reasonable supposition, and a far cry from some of the more outlandish Tartessian claims that are made.

Oh, yes, I agree with Marquis analysis. Absolutely. But, the scientist speaks again, as reasonable as it actually is, it still provides no proof that what Marquis suggested actually occurred. Not all peoples evolve necessarily the same way.

Knowing now that you did not know Schulten's theories, yes. See, all the 'problem' arose when you revived this thread quoting a passage that was so obviously influenced by Schulten's analyses. Then I thought, hey! another 'Schultenite'! On that assumption I replied. Still, I must say that Schulten aside, in the absence of archeological evidence I still do not accept Herodotus et al's descriptions as conclusive of anything. As Marquis pointed out, they are suggestive of, but not more than that.

Btw, I havent haad a chance to reply to the message you posted yesterday, but basically I concur with it 100%. Of course I still maintain that educated guesses don't make truths

As to whether a centralized government arose or not, the only we know about that has not been independently verified. Not to get back to the same issue Why could not you think about of a loose confederation of villages or something along these lines?

Also, what is your field of work, anyways?

Medical Biochemistry. Not very related to this, uh?

Any more thoughts on the Bible related stuff?

Yes. I am perfectly aware that what I posted about Jericho and David/Solomon is what I learned from reading certain authors. I really do not know if these authors are right or wrong. They just managed to convince me, just like Schulten convinced Fiera I think I'm going to grab a copy of that book you recommended to us so strongly.

One problem with this thread is Fiera and Jesus are so busy writing here that neither can help me determine which cities actually existed in Iberia in 500 BC .

Tomorrow is Spain's National Holyday. That means no work (hey wait, I think I haven't told you yet that I temporarily moved back to Spain. It's been many months since our last chat I think). Anyway, if my daugthers sign an armidstice with me I should have plenty of time tomorrow to get what you need. I bet Fiera's list is gonna be essentially identical to mine, except for Tartessos City, of course .

[Jay Bee]

Originally posted by Harlan
I can't say I know anything about it, but I would be surprised if there were no elephants in Iberia at that time. Reason I say this is because it is well known elephants, tigers and many other animals - heck, even hippos - were in ancient Greece around 500 BC. The climates were much different then, as Jesus acknoledges in his 216 BC scenario, covering most all of Iberia with forest. More important than climate change, people hadn't gotten around to wiping them out, which is what happened in Greece and other places not very long after.

Oh well, the reason why Schulten suggested Tartessos was rich in ivory is because of a report praising the enormous amount of ivory that could be found in biblical Tarshish. I do not know about this, but how many ivory objects have been found of unequivocally pre-Turdetan origin. That might give us a definite answer to that.

By the way Jesus, I asked you several questions in my last posting above. I'd still like to hear answers.

I was writing while you were posting this