From: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org (chakram-refugees-digest) To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: chakram-refugees-digest V6 #174 Reply-To: chakram-refugees@smoe.org Sender: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk chakram-refugees-digest Wednesday, September 27 2006 Volume 06 : Number 174 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [chakram-refugees] RE: ancient sumer's xena ["mirrordrum" Subject: RE: [chakram-refugees] RE: ancient sumer's xena - -----Original Message----- From: owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org [mailto:owner-chakram-refugees@smoe.org]On Behalf Of Cheryl Ande Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:26 PM To: chakram-refugees-digest@smoe.org Subject: [chakram-refugees] RE: ancient sumer's xena [respectful smip] [smip???] >As for Sumerian grave I am astonished that even in the 1920's an archaeologist would get rid of bones found in an obviously royal tomb. That seems like just terrible scholarship - I don't think I ever heard of such thing before - it almost seems that Woolley was trying to hide something. i'm not just astonished, i don't believe it. the only thing i really know about "archaeology" is how to find it in the encyclopaedia. however, i've always had the notion that if there's anything archaeologists do it's cling to old stuff like anything: artifacts, bones, carvings, trash piles, garbage dumps, graves and whatever comes out of them and that they make detailed, uh, diagrams? maps? whatever about where everything is found and then they pack it all up in boxes and send it to basements and museums and other places to be studied and arranged and argued about and possibly fought over. > It is very difficult to dissuade the academic community from long held beliefs even if they are based on incomplete information or faulty scholarship. it is very difficult to dissuade people in general from long and sometimes even short-held beliefs, all of which are inevitably based on incomplete information [i don't think such a thing as "complete information" exists] but you're right, academics are that way too and the major problem is, they're not supposed to be. it's supposed to be part of the job description. >If for 80 years we have assumed all Sumerian rulers had to be men based on the few graves that were study in the 1920's then it is considered a fact when it is nothing of the sort. It is amusing how many stories can be made up to explain contradictory evidence - the husband left the weapons as a gift (if the woman can't use the weapons why give them to her for use in the afterlife), the husband is buried elsewhere (why doesn't he need his weapons?). In fact perhaps we can make the argument the Woolley's male skeleton that was dressed as a woman and his female skeleton adorned as a warrior were actually a cross-dressing couple or it was an elaborate ruse to confuse demons - anything except that our long held assumptions are wrong. marvelous point. i had the same idea about the cross-dressing, btw. ;) md ========================================================= This has been a message to the chakram-refugees list. To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@smoe.org with "unsubscribe chakram-refugees" in the message body. Contact meth@smoe.org with any questions or problems. ========================================================= ------------------------------ End of chakram-refugees-digest V6 #174 **************************************