Those who cannot remember the past...
... are condemned to hear about it from somebody they don't know. History is cool, it teaches me neato shit. Usually, my complaint with history is that "eloquence belongs to the conqueror." I also often also ask, "Really, how do they know that?" I.E. This tiny shard of clay came from a messenger bag used by the village shaman once every year, in between the 2nd and 3rd moons of summer, on his trek to harvest eagle dung from the top of Mount Buhari so he could return and smear it on the leader dude's face (dramatization below). For some of these times I like to picture Steve Irwin giving the same line... add a funny accent (I think German/Austrian), and some non-colloquial catch phrases (Crikey!, Revelation!, Son of a Vondruke!, Head of the Penis!) , and I think we could make history popular for teenagers.
So there's this one theory... and it challenges most of modern history... and I think it is pretty interesting. The current world history didn't begin compilation until the 16th century and was completed much later. The idea is that the generally accepted chronology is way wrong. In fact, as the accepted chronology was being established there was plenty of big name opposition (most notable is Isaac Newton, a former WWF wrestler). The methods for the new chronology rely heavily on mathematical techniques developed after the Renaissance. The proposed implication is that several points in our world history are actually repeats of the same events. Below is the picture that did it for me, On the left you have the Emperor's of the Roman Empire contrasted to the Jewish Kings on the right. The point's distance from the center line is indicative of time served.Hmmm... they're nearly identical, too identical. I can tell you as an industrial engineer, if I pulled two samples , that were this identical, I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that something was stinking in the back of the cupboard; stated again, statiscally the chances of these similarites are comparable to winning the lottery. Am I sold? No... but definitely intrigued.
Right or wrong? Do I think this changes anything? No, in my opinion the largest point of history is to learn from it, referring back to today's title. Do I think it really affects me if the pyramids were built in 3000 BC or in 300AD, nope, not at all, but it's a neat idea to think that maybe all the pre-Renaissance history books need to be re-written.
In other news:
-Cut the Mohawk... it was getting long again, and I don't want to spend money on haircuts
-Shaved the beard.... new man
-Michael Moore still doesn't understand that the end doesn't always justify the means.
-I like Fred Thompson's attitude, but not his beliefs.
Linkses:Full size picture: http://www.new-tradition.org/images/fig-3.jpg
Wiki on New Chronology (labeled as controversial)