Archaeologica.org

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:05 pm**

Yes, but I mean someone who could say yae or nae on whether a show has enough merit to be aired. If I was on staff at HI this show would never have even made it to production.

Truthfully....they are in the business of selling advertising for historically "themed" programming. I doubt if the suits give a shit one way or the other if its factual.

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:33 pm**

but I mean someone who could say yae or nae on whether a show has enough merit to be aired. If I was on staff at HI this show would never have even made it to production.

fraank, 'place joke here'... i am sure you would do a good job but i would have to say that money would play a large part in who was hired, which is why jacobovici got the job...he probably comes cheap.

He just ignores what they say and blunders off on his merry way

that is just it, he doesn't care about presenting anything factual, just his own ideas and he doesn't let anything get in his way of doing that..even the truth.

i could do without all the 'cut-ins', what a waste of film and time. his idea of film making redines the word 'bizarre'.

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:20 pm**

Well, I have to agree with everyone - that show sucked. It leaves me wondering how and where he dreamed some of this stuff up.

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:22 pm**

Simcha is an independent producer/director, meaning that he does not "work for" anyone. As such, he is free to produce/direct whatever the hell he likes.

I wouldn't mind seeing a disclaimer to the effect that the "opinions expressed are not those of the station or its employees...etc, etc." but if someone is dumb enough to believe his nonsense in the first place what good would such a disclaimer do?

One would have to hope that anyone dumb enough to fall for his line of shit would not be watching History Internation in the first place. Pro Wrestling would be more their speed.

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 7:04 pm**

I felt the entire presentation of his premise seemed geared towards inciting just the reaction he is getting on this thread. He seemed more like a failed comedian than an archaeologist.

However I find the subject matter extremely intriguing. I have always believed the Greeks invented the alphabet. So who really did invent the alphabet?

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:04 pm**

So who really did invent the alphabet?

according to wikipedia-- the egyptians but i don't take them as an absolute authority especially since they messed up the korean language history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_alphabet

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:10 pm**

Tonight's two episodes involved the forgery of artifacts.

A better presentation - more balanced than usual - to a degree. They concentrate on the James Ossuary but totally neglect the Joash Inscription which Oded Golan was also involved with. Still.....these two are an improvement.

Posted: **Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:15 pm**

Starflower wrote: So who really did invent the alphabet?

I'll stick with the Phoenecians.

http://columbia.thefreedictionary.com/Phoenecians

Phoenician artisans, who were skilled architects, were imported by the Egyptians, and Hiram, King of Tyre, lent assistance to Solomon in building. Their greatest contribution to Western civilization, however, was the development of a standardized phonetic alphabet, which was a great improvement over the more ambiguous cuneiform and hieroglyphic. The Phoenician alphabet served as a basis for the Greek alphabet and was a key factor in the development of Greek literature.

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 1:48 am**

I'll stick with the Phoenecians

i will agree with that.

i think wikipedia listened to jacobovici on its rendition.

A better presentation

we shall see

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:58 am**

i have come to the conclusion that jacobovici really isn't that smart. which is probably why he avoids real scholarship in his shows.

though this one was a little better {herod} he kept wanting to turn the discussion from real archaeology into some sexual fantasy of his. i do not see what can be gained by producing such shows as they fail to promote anything that is factual or constructive.

anyone else have thoughts on this episode??

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 3:36 am**

From what you're all saying it sounds pretty clear what he stands to gain from these shows which sound rather like a roundabout way of shouting HEY EVERYBODY STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND LOOK AT ME!!!

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 9:19 am**

Precisely, W/A. Hitchcock used to always sneak into his movies but the camera wasn't on him the whole time!

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:49 am**

Herod downloaded. Next 2 downloading now. I'll watch them a little later.

'Preciate it, Min.

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:06 am**

De Nada.

The forgery ones are the best....he even picks an argument with Israel Finkelstein!

I think subconciously that Jacobovici is on the side of the dealers and looters which is why he sticks to the ossuary and stays away from the Joash inscription. However, he does a fair job of trying to present both sides of the debate.

However -

http://www.macleans.ca/topstories/relig ... 756_102756

Look what shakes out in the wash!

Lemaire passed the news on to Hershel Shanks, founder and editor of Biblical Archaeology Review, a popular history magazine based in Washington. Shanks was excited, and agreed to publish an article by Lemaire in the fall edition of his magazine as a world exclusive.

In mid-September, Shanks arranged for two researchers at the Geological Survey of Israel to authenticate the inscription. They examined the box's patina -- the natural coating that builds up on objects over time. After a single day of tests, they said it was consistent with 2,000-year-old stone and didn't appear to contain any modern materials. Shanks showed photographs of the inscription to two other well-respected specialists in ancient scripts and the Aramaic language. Both gave it a provisional thumbs-up. Shanks sold the film rights to Simcha Jacobovici, an award-winning documentary filmmaker from Toronto. He struck a book deal with Harper Collins. Then, on Oct. 10, he called the Royal Ontario Museum.

Posted: **Thu Nov 02, 2006 1:13 pm**

Look what shakes out in the wash

that was a good read and it puts shanks in a different light, one in which i am not impressed. it seems he is more about money than actual archaeology.

Good thing he is a jew and not a christian or i would never hear the end of it from minimalist.

Archaeologica.org

Oh Christ!!

Who Invented the Alphabet?

Re: Who Invented the Alphabet?