Re: Life Love and the Universe in drwho on usenet


"solar penguin" <solar.penguin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:8fd13f08-3831-49bb-9805-d0d85e97971c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 4 Sep, 22:44, "Agamemnon" wrote:

"Peter J Ross"wrote in message
news:slrngc0bd5.3v6.pjr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> In rec.arts.drwho on Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:26:11 +0100, Agamemnon
> wrote:
>
>> "Peter J Ross" wrote in message
>> news:slrngc0783.3v6.pjr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>> Do you believe that Theseus ruled Athens?
>>
>> Yes. Thesues is an undisputed historical king of Athens.
>
> "Theseus (Greek: Θησεύς) was a legendary king of Athens"

No he wasn't. There was only one Theseus and his existence is a historically
documented and undisputed FACT.

<<<Since people ARE disputing it, it cannot be an "undisputed" fact.>>>

We are not talking about the ignorant in this newsgroup. We are talking about ancient HISTORIANS!

He was not the combination of any other
kings of the same name of who did similar deeds so he is not legendary.

> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theseus>

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, nearly all of them unqualified.


<<<So far that hasn't prevented them from disputing the fact.>>>

They are not historians let alone ancient ones.

> Do you consider legend and history to be the same?

You don't have a clue what legend means or what history is. See above.
Theseus is a historically documented and undisputed FACT. There is NOT ONE
single ancient historian who disputed his existence.

<<<You're doing that "mixing up past and present tense" thing again. You
do it so often that I'm beginning to wonder if it's not just the
tenses but the actual concepts of past and present that confuse you...>>>

You are a FOOL! All we know about ancient history comes from ancient historical texts. Unless of course you have a time machine and have been there.

> Irrelevant, unless Theseus is named.

TWADDLE! Theseus bones were documented with his name at his shrine in Scyros
when Cimon brought them back to Athens.

<<<And they did forensic DNA tests to confirm these were the right
bones...?>>>

Did they do forensic DNA tests to confirm William the Conqueror and Richard I are the right bones and ancestors of Queen Elizabeth II?


Nope. They were Theseus bones. If you dispute they were Theseus bones, when
this event happened only 800 years after Theseus death then you might as
well dispute that the bones of William the Conqueror and those of all the
English kings up to about 1200 AD including those of Richard I which are
interred in France are actually theirs too.

<<<Not a very good example. IIRC there _is_ some dispute about whether
or not William the Conqueror's one surviving bone really is his.
There may even be some dispute about other kings' bones too, but I
don't remember the details.>>>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Life Love and the Universe in drwho on usenet
    ... Not one ancient historian disputed Theseus existence, therefore it is impossible to draw the conclusion for any historical texts anywhere or by anybody that Theseus did not exist, since all history concerning the period in question is derived from what the ancient historians passed on to us. ... They are not historians if they dispute it, and no historian is in any position to dispute it unless they have a time machine. ... There may even be some dispute about other kings' bones too, ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Silver Nemesis reborn, only with cappier music
    ... as the list of England's kings of the time is ... Geoffrey of Monmouth's accounts are corroborated by extant Roman historians. ... If you believe in a conspiracy theory then ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • out of the liberal yellow bow
    ... all these powers, subdue even these kings, these learned men and these ... Christ as poor in the poor, Jesus Christ as rich in the rich, Jesus Christ ... On the fact that neither Josephus, nor Tacitus, nor other historians ... As Jesus Christ remained unknown among men, ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Life Love and the Universe in drwho on usenet
    ... You may be talking about ancient historians, ... There may even be some dispute about other kings' bones too, ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Lord ONeill of Shanes Castle
    ... :> would have had an unbroken line of historic Kings back to about A.D. ... Unfortunately Irish historians still believe religiously in just such ... quoted by Edmund Curtis: A History of Mediaeval Ireland) ...
    (alt.talk.royalty)