Dante was a Myth, not a historical character

[InvisibleBallots]

What? How could this be? Isn't there plenty of evidence of the existence of Dante? Doesn't carbon 14 dating, corrected by tree rings, prove that Dante was a real historical character?

Nope. Even simple questions about Dante - like when he lived and where he died - is shrouded in mythology and political propaganda. In fact, it's likely he never exited at all, but instead was invented by Foscolo.

http://www.revisedhistory.org/dante.htm

Dante is one of the most enigmatic and mystic figures of world history and culture. Despite the fact that in the middle of the 19th century they began to call him the Central Man of the World, as early as the end of the 18th century he remained practically unknown not only to the reader at large, but even to specialists. Voltaire’s skeptical exclamation in the “Philosophical Dictionary,” that, per se, no one reads Dante, is well known.

At the end of the 18th century, he was considered a little known, medieval Italian poet, the author of a composition under the name of “Satire" (Filip Nereusz Golanski, “On Articulation in Poetry," 1808.)

He had neither predecessors (in the 13th century, needless to say), nor followers all the way to the 17th century, when Milton, as they think, inspired by the “Divine Comedy,” created his own immortal “Paradise Lost.”

The “discovery” of Dante for mankind occurs only at the end of the 18th century, in the epoch of romanticism. (IB: What sort of conspiracy theory accounts for the secret manuscripts of Dante being preserved for hundreds of years?) And the Italian romantic poets Vittorio Alfieri, Vincenzo Monti and, especially, Ugo Foscolo discovered him. In the period of the desperate struggle for Italy’s freedom, Dante became a symbol of the independence and dignity of man.

He ended up just at the right time and was a spokesman of national aspirations and a prophet of the country’s unity and a freedom.

[Inland]

1. "Voltaire's skeptical exclamation"? As if there ever was a "Voltaire"!

this supposed author and playwright "Voltaire" was actually a symposim of Paris "salonistes" who wrote bawdy and cynical tomes that would never be accepted in the 1910's, when the works of "Voltaire" were actually composed.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

3. As if there is something called Inland on the Internets!

Harrrumph.
We are all figments of Will Pitt's imagination.

[InvisibleBallots]

4. clever attempt at satire, but do you understand the difference?

You see, we have writings of Voltaire, published during his lifetime, with other people commenting on his work. We do not have that for Dante.

[Inland]

15. We have the writings of "Voltaire".

As for when they were published, and by whom, and who commented on them--well, who is to say?

After all, there is a huge number of works of great skill which were published centuries after the fact, anonymously, and then entire bodies of "commentary" and references planted in supposed history. Homer, Plutarch, Herodutus, Thucydides, Ovid, Julius Caesar, all had writings attributed to "them" but all the compositions were in fact products of huge conspiratorial groups intending to create great works of literature in order to promote contemporary political purposes.

Prove Voltaire is any different.

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

17. The continuning controversy over who Shakespear was

is another example.
So is the author of some of the Cannonicial books of the Bible.

[InvisibleBallots]

20. the controversy over Shakespeare is actually very related

to this discussion. When the supposed "ancient" classical history was being propagated throughout Europe, many of the plays of Shakespeare were in fact derived from these stories. If you take into account the political need for ancient histories (discussed in Machiavelli's Prince) you'll find the rulers of Europe used Shakespeare in exactly the same way.

English and British monarchs still to this day claim they are decendent of King David, Jesus Christ, or the ancient Roman emperors. That's the backstory to "Da Vinci Code" and the work it's based on, "Holy Blood Holy Grail".

[InvisibleBallots]

19. are you being serious, or making a joke?

Here's the difference between Voltaire and Dante - Voltaire was widely published DURING HIS OWN TIME, and had contemporaries writing about his work.

Dante, on the other hand, was "discovered" by miraculous finds of ancient manuscripts, supposedly preserved by secret societies - in other words, a conspiracy theory.

So again, the difference is that Voltaire was published in his own time, discussed, disputed, and talked about by his contemporaries. Dante, on the other hand, had no one discussing him until hundreds of years after his supposed life and death. Do you see the difference?

[BurtWorm]

2. Spit it out. What you're really saying is that

pink unicorns exist. :evilgrin:

[InvisibleBallots]

6. er, no

I'm not really saying that pink unicorns exist, sorry.

It's too bad that there is such a closed minded reaction to all this - for instance, if I claimed that pagans really invented all Christian holidays, and posted a link to some random website - I'd receive a warm reception. But questioning the humanist tradition just gets hostile reaction. Just the reverse case of the fundies.

[BurtWorm]

8. er, interesting.

:hi:

[InvisibleBallots]

9. Burt perhaps I misunderstood

By your line "spit it out what you are really saying is that pink unicorns exist" - what did that mean?

I took it to mean that you were accusing me of somehow claiming that since the humanist and classical history is largely mythological, that therefore God exists, and the Christian history is correct?

I assume I was mistaken, because someone would have to really, really have a chip on their shoulder to get that from anything I wrote!

I've been studying Fomenko, Russian historical revisionism, and the various works for 2 years now. I don't claim any belief in God or religion, and I sure as hell don't believe that the Catholic version of history is correct.

But of course, that's not what you were implying, right? :hi:

[BurtWorm]

10. Interesting that you'd bring this up in this forum.

You probably meant to post it in fiction but "missed." Right? ;)

[InvisibleBallots]

11. nope

I thought since this forum specifically has lots of posts dedicated to historical revisionism, it might find an interested audience here.

But it looks like I was mistaken - if it doesn't fit into a pro-pagan or pro-humanist viewpoint, no one seems to want to even research it. I wonder why that is?

:hi:

[BurtWorm]

12. I'm sorry if you were offended by the implication that there was a hidden

agenda behind the post. ;)

Incidentally, I would want to research it if I could trust the sincerity of the poster. Maybe it's plausible. :shrug:

[InvisibleBallots]

13. I was not offended, please don't be sorry!

And you certainly have no reason to trust me, nor my sincerity.

However, if you are really interested, if I were you, I'd research some of the recent work being done by Russian and German scientists. I'd especially research the Scaliger/Petavius historical chronology, the anti-scientific methods (like numerology, astrogology, etc) that they used to come up with it. Then I'd ask - why hasn't anyone done any major research on this yet?

Don't believe a word I say - look at the evidence for yourself. I'm just some random guy posting on the internet! :hi:

[BurtWorm]

16. Funny that you persist in pursuing this here when you have no theological

agenda. :hi:

[InvisibleBallots]

18. isn't it theological?

I would say that much of the "classical and humanist history" is in fact, theology, not history or science. Also, this forum seems to be the place to discuss the theology of Neo-Paganism, which as I've mentioned, is based on what I think is mythological history.

So again, isn't this the forum where we discuss the supposedly ancient traditions of paganism, and debunk false claims by Christian sources? Or is it that only Christian sources are criticized here, and pagan and humanist sources are taken as Gospel? ;)

[BurtWorm]

21. So you're claiming that history, philosophy and science are pagan

and therefore essentially religious. This is what you really believe.







Interesting. :shrug:

[InvisibleBallots]

22. no

No, of course not, I didn't say anything of the kind. Whatever. Post back if you're interested in a discussion about Dante. :shrug:

[BurtWorm]

23. Post it in the nonfiction forum and maybe I'll join you.

Otherwise I'll continue questionuing why anyone should play this transparent game with you. You're obviously insincere and have some hidden agenda. :hi:

[InvisibleBallots]

24. now you are personally attacking me

"You're obviously insincere and have some hidden agenda."

How rude of you. Isn't this against the rules? Frankly, I doubt you even understand what I'm posting, or have any clue as to the history I'm describing, or the research that's being done on it. Ignorance breeding hostility?

Whatever, go ahead and have the last post if you wish, I don't see any reason to continue a discussion with you, when all you do is attack my motivations.

Here, perhaps try another slur on my motivations? Go ahead:

[BurtWorm]

25. Do you mean to tell me that your purpose in posting about Dante

in this forum is to post about Dante? What's with all the ;)-ing and references to pagan versus Christian revisionism?

[no_hypocrisy]

5. That's amusing. When I studied Dante, it was Beatrice who might have

been fictional, as Petrarch's Laura for the inspiration for the poetry.

I'm not certain if Dante is buried in Lucca, where he spent many of his years, exiled from Florence.

[InvisibleBallots]

7. who "discovered" Dante?

Do we know much about this?

[InvisibleBallots]

14. here's an overview of the existing chronology problems

for anyone who cares, here's an interesting essay on how our standard, accepted chronology of ancient events was invented.

http://www.hermetic.ch/compsci/techchron.htm

Turning to more technical reasons for the general decline of chronology by 1700, it is apparent that Scaliger and his imitators had largely exhausted the available technology of their day. Scaliger was a brilliant scholar who studied mathematics among his many accomplishments, but he was not a mathematician. His geometrical proof of the quadrature of the circle is false, for example, although he defended it during his entire lifetime. As a consequence, Scaliger set chronology on a general course that did not emphasize mathematics, although it certainly used mathematics productively.

Historically, however, additional substantial progress in chronology simply had to wait for two developments:

(a) an external means of validating chronology (archaeology and dating techniques)

(b) some means of performing extended mathematical computations that permit exploring complex scenarios and relationships in a reasonable time frame (computers and their software).

In Scaliger's time, chronology focused of necessity on documents and epigraphical studies. No mature science of archaeology existed in his day, and no scientific techniques for dating objects and documents were available. As a consequence, no field external to chronology existed that could validate or invalidate, corroborate or disprove, any conclusions reached by a chronologer.

Likewise, neither Scaliger, nor his imitators or contemporaries had readily available computation resources that would have enabled them, for example, to compare dates with astronomical events with speed and accuracy, correlate complex chronologies, or perform any of the other involved computations that form a necessary part of the modern research arsenal.

That chronology languished as a field of study for several centuries is not an unusual occurrence in the history of science. Science often progresses at an uneven rate, waiting for technological breakthroughs or progress in related fields to spark innovation or permit further evolution. Chronology is a science. Lacking an external means of validation, and links to other related sciences, it could not free itself from potential capture by polemicists and ideologues. Chronology is also, by definition, a computational science. Without computational resources, it could not proceed past manual mathematics.

[indigobusiness]

26. Dante was an early incarnation of the Comte de Saint-Germain

Comte Saint GERMAIN

Real Name: Comte (Count) de Saint Germain

Identity/Class: Human mutate/magic user

Occupation: Count; agent of Dracula

Affiliations: former servant of Dracula; directed the Toys

Enemies: Cammy Brandeis, Max Parrish, Johnny and Sue Storm, Zarathos

Known Relatives: see comments

Aliases: Ascended Master, Der Wundermann, The Wonderman, Secret Master;
Germonster (via Johnny Storm)

Base of Operations: England and France in the 18th Century; possibly a number of countries over hundreds to even thousands of years.

First Appearance: (MU) <Dracula's ally> Before the Fantastic Four: The Storms#1 (December 2000)
<as alias of the Devil Doctor> Shang-Chi: Master of Kung Fu#1 (November, 2002)

Powers/Abilities: St. Germain is allegedly immortal, and possesses a mastery of alchemy and various forms of non-traditional medicines. He is skilled in numerous languages and is an adept in a number of forms of spiritualism.

St. Germain, sent by Dracula, was a non-human, golem-type of creature which may or may not be directly connected to the original. This being was also likely immortal, but also could transform into a type of earth elemental, able to grow in size and strength by absorbing earth, brick, masonry, and other minerals. He can also alter his form to some degree, sharpening his limbs into razor-sharp points, etc. As an earth elemental, he is vulnerable to water.
He did not appear to possess eyes, but instead used an unidentified pair of orbs which he placed into his eye sockets, perhaps when he wished to take an active role, or to assume his earth elemental form.

He also controlled the Toys.

History:

(History/Legend) - The Comte de Saint-Germain first emerged in 1745 England. In 1755, Saint-Germain showed up in Paris. Insinuating himself into the aristocracy, he claimed to live completely off of a strange elixir, which he sold at a large price. Saint-Germain claimed he did not require food or beverage to survive. He claimed to have lived during the Crusades, to have known Richard the Lion-Hearted. The Comte seemed to die in 1782, in the court of the Prince of Hesse Cassel. Of course, given his alleged immortality, a sighting of him in 1821 Vienna reputedly occurred, while in the book Souvenirs by Countess d'Adhemar stated the Comte appeared in France in 1793. She claimed more sightings up to 1820.
In 1845, Franz Graffer declared in his memoirs that he met Saint-Germain, and stated that it came to his attention that the Comte would appear in the Himalayas circa 1900. Circa 1900, reputed sightings of the Comte in Tibet occurred. He had attained the status of "ascended master" or "secret master". In the 1930's, in California's Mount Shasta, an appearance of the Comte tied to the "I AM" cult was reported. In 1972, a man named Richard Chanfray claimed to be the Comte. Chelsea Quinn Yarbro wrote a series of novels with the Comte de Saint-Germain as a vampire.

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/stgermai.htm

snip

It was at the end of the nineteenth century that the legend of Saint-Germain grew so inordinately. By reason of his knowledge, of the integrity of his life, of his wealth and of the mystery that surrounded him, he might reasonably have been taken for an heir of the first Rosicrucians, for a possessor of the Philosopher's Stone. But the theosophists and a great many occultists regarded him as a master of the great White Lodge of the Himalayas. The legend of these masters is well known. According to it there live in inaccessible lamaseries in Tibet certain wise men who possess the ancient secrets of the lost civilization of Atlantis. Sometimes they send to their imperfect brothers, who are blinded by passions and ignorance, sublime messengers to teach and guide them. Krishna, the Buddha, and Jesus were the greatest of these. But there were many other more obscure messengers, of whom Saint-Germain has been considered to be one.

"This pupil of Hindu and Egyptian hierophants, this holder of the secret knowledge of the East," theosophist Madam Blavatsky says of him, "was not appreciated for who he was. The stupid world has always treated in this way men who, like Saint-Germain, have returned to it after long years of seclusion devoted to study with their hands full of the treasure of esoteric wisdom and with the hope of making the world better, wiser and happier." Between 1880 and 1900 it was admitted among all theosophists, who at that time had become very numerous, particularly in England and America, that the Comte de Saint-Germain was still alive, that he was still engaged in the spiritual development of the West, and that those who sincerely took part in this development had the possibility of meeting him.

The brotherhood of Khe-lan was famous throughout Tibet, and one of their most famous brothers was an Englishman who had arrived one day during the early part of the twentieth century from the West. He spoke every language, including the Tibetan, and knew every art and science, says the tradition. His sanctity and the phenomena produced by him caused him to be proclaimed a Shaberon Master after a residence of but a few years. His memory lives to the present day among the Tibetans, but his real name is a secret with the Shaberons alone. Might not this mysterious traveler be the Comte de Saint-Germain?

snip