Brit-Am Historical Reports
(April 28, 2020, 4 Iyar 5780)
Contents:
1. Amnon Goldberg: Is the Eath Really at the Center of the Universe?
2. Archaeology. Tropical Vanilla Used in Ancient Canaan
Vanilla in the Middle Bronze Age: New Findings from Megiddo
3. Ancient Seal Found from First Temple Times
4. The role of MI6 [British Intelligence] in Egypt's decision to go to war against Israel in May 1948
by Meir Zamir
5. European Connections of Philistine People
New Finds from 'Sea People' Settlement
6. THE CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT KINGDOMS AMENDED.
By Sir ISAAC NEWTON. CHAP. III. Of the ASSYRIAN Empire.
7. Why did Iron Age civilizations have an advantage over Bronze Age civilizations?
by Nick Deakin
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
1. Amnon Goldberg: Is the Eath Really at the Center of the Universe?
My letter in this week's Jewish Tribune:
The report on the NASA cubesat mission (Science and Technology, JT April 7) showed a depiction of the massive sun with all the planets, including the Earth, orbiting it. The idea of heliocentrism only gained widespread belief in the 17th century, it being claimed that large masses cannot go round small ones, called the 'Barycentric Argument'.
Yet current Relativistic scientific thinking has it that it is not possible to determine with certitude from within the universe what exactly is going around what. To do so, one would have to go outside the physical universe, observe from there, and then report back inside!
The British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle pointed out that the Earth does not technically revolve around the sun, but rather the Earth and sun both revolve around the centre of mass of the Earth-sun system, which is quite a few miles from the Sun's central axis.
Hoyle points out that one must factor in all objects, starting with the nearest stars, to recalculate the true centre-of-mass of the Earth-sun-universe. Once one has properly applied the barycentric argument to all other entities in the universe (known as "widening the view angle of one's telescope to avoid self-serving tunnel vision"), then the centre-of-mass of the universe may easily be at the Earth's location, making it impossible to disprove the geocentric hypothesis.
The barycentric argument is only properly applied when every object in our physical universe, Asiyah HaGashmi, including the ultradense Firmament (the phenomenal Planck Density value of 10 to the power of 96 kilograms per cubic metre inexorably points this way) has been factored into the centre-of-mass calculation, a calculation that has never been done. Consistent application of the barycentric argument, layer by layer, places the centre-of-mass farther away from the Sun and closer to the Earth, and then the barycentric argument can easily and fully support pure geocentricity: "The Earth is suspended at the centre of the universe" (Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 3),"It is my firm belief that it is the sun that revolves around the Earth, as I have also declared publicly on various occasions and in discussion with professors specializing in this field of science" (Lubavitcher Rebbe), "The Earth is established, it cannot be moved" (Tehillim 93)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
2. Archaeology. Tropical Vanilla Used in Ancient Canaan
Vanilla in the Middle Bronze Age: New Findings from Megiddo
By Melissa S. Cradic and Vanessa Linares
http://www.asor.org/anetoday/2020/01/Vanilla-in-the-Middle-Bronze-Age
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
3. Ancient Seal Found from First Temple Times
Tiny First Temple seal impression found with name of Bible-era royal steward
https://www.timesofisrael.com/tiny-first-temple-seal-impression-inscribed-with-biblical-royal-stewards-name/
Inscribed with 'Belonging to Adoniyahu, Royal Steward,' a clay sealing from the 7th century BCE uncovered from earth excavated at the foundations of the Western Wall
By AMANDA BORSCHEL-DAN
Extracts:
According to archaeologist Eli Shukron, this inscription is unique and 'of utmost importance.' The role of the Royal Steward (Asher al Habayit), he said, appears several times in the Bible and is used for the highest-level minister in the royal court. For example, the title of Royal Steward was used in the Book of Genesis for Joseph's high-powered position in Egypt.
'
In March, another rare bulla was published by the City of David bearing the inscription '(belonging) to Nathan-Melech, Servant of the King' (LeNathan-Melech Eved HaMelech). Nathan-Melech is named in 2 Kings as an official in the court of King Josiah. And in February 2018, another, partial clay sealing was discovered, which may spell out 'Belonging to Isaiah,' (l'Yesha-yah[u]) and is arguably tied to the Prophet Isaiah.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
4. The role of MI6 [British Intelligence] in Egypt's decision to go to war against Israel in May 1948
by Meir Zamir
https://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/UbyBtHKfiix7D3Gr9Ygs/full?goal=10.1080/02684527.2019.1616389
David Ben-Gurion, the founder of the State of Israel, repeatedly accused Britain of provoking the Arab states to invade Israel the day after its establishment in May 1948. To date, historians have not found proof of his accusations in British archives. However, evidence may be found in French archives, especially in Syrian and secret British documents obtained by the French secret services, originating from agents who had infiltrated the Syrian government in Damascus and the British Legation in Beirut. This article, based on French, Syrian, Israeli and British sources, argues that under the Labour government, Arabist MI6 officers in the Middle East, in collaboration with the British High Command in Cairo, pursued an alternative policy to that of the Foreign Office. They provoked Egypt';s King Faruq to go to war against Israel without the knowledge or approval of either Prime Minister Clement Attlee or Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin, frequently misinforming and misleading them.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
5. European Connections of Philistine People
New Finds from 'Sea People' Settlement
http://archaeology.best/new-finds-from-sea-people-settlement/?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral
January 26, 2020
Extracts:
Scientists from the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, say they have unearthed a 3,100-year-old building and a number of artifacts at the archaeological site of Tell Abu al-Kharaz in Jordan.
Tell Abu al-Kharaz ('Mound of the Father of Beads') is located in the Jordan Valley, close to the border to Israel and the West Bank. The settlement was identified with the biblical city of Jabesh Gilead.
Archaeologists believe the settlement was founded around 3200 BC and flourished during three periods: 3100-2900 BC, 1600-1300 BC and 1100-700 BC.
The site has been excavated during 1989-2013 under the direction of Prof Peter Fischer.
Reconstruction of the 3,100-year-old building unearthed at Tell Abu al-Kharaz. Image credit: University of Gothenburg.
'We have evidence that culture from present Europe is represented in Tell Abu al-Kharaz. A group of the Sea Peoples of European descent, the Philistines, settled down in the city,' Prof Fischer said.
'We have, for instance, found pottery resembling corresponding items from Greece and Cyprus in terms of form and decoration, and also cylindrical loom weights for textile production that could be found in Central and South-Eastern Europe around the same time.'
During recent excavation seasons Prof Fischer and his colleagues have uncovered well-preserved stone structures, including defensive walls and buildings, and thousands of objects produced locally or imported from South-Eastern Europe. They have found few artifacts exported from Middle Egypt around 3100 BC.ar-old building at Tell Abu al-Kharaz. Image credit: University of Gothenburg.
'What surprises me the most is that we have found so many objects from far away. This shows that people were very mobile already thousands of years ago.'
'One of our conclusions after the excavation is that 'Jordanian culture' is clearly a Mediterranean culture even though the country does not border the Mediterranean Sea. There were well-organized societies in the area long before the Egyptian pyramids were built,'
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
6. THE CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT KINGDOMS AMENDED.
By Sir ISAAC NEWTON. CHAP. III.
Of the ASSYRIAN Empire.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/15784/15784-h/15784-h.htm#chapIII
Extracts:
re Herodotus:
as if the Empire of the Medes, erected upon the ruins of the Assyrian Empire, had lasted 300 years, whereas it lasted but 72: and the true Empire of the Assyrians described in Scripture, whose Kings were Pul, Tiglath-pilesar, Shalmaneser, Sennacherib, Asserhadon, &c. he mentions not, ...
As Amos names not the Assyrians; at the writing of this prophecy they made no great figure in the world, but were to be raised up against Israel, and by consequence rose up in the days of Pul and his successors: for after Jeroboam had conquered Damascus and Hamath, his successor Menahem destroyed Tiphsah with its territories upon Euphrates, because they opened not to him: and therefore Israel continued in its greatness 'till Pul, probably grown formidable by some victories, caused Menahem to buy his peace. Pul therefore Reigning presently after the prophesy of Amos, and being the first upon record who began to fulfill it, may be justly reckoned the first conqueror and founder of this Empire. For God stirred up the spirit of Pul, and the spirit of Tiglath-pileser King of Assyria, 1 Chron. v. 20.
... Between the Reigns of Jeroboam II, and his son Zachariah, there was an interregnum of about ten or twelve years in the Kingdom of Israel: and the prophet Hosea [355] in the time of that interregnum, or soon after, mentions the King of Assyria by the name of Jareb, and another conqueror by the name of Shalman; and perhaps Shalman might be the first part of the name of Shalmaneser, and Iareb, or Irib, for it may be read both ways, the last part of the name of his successor Sennacherib: but whoever these Princes were, it appears not that they Reigned before Shalmaneser. Pul, or Belus, seems to be the first who carried on his conquests beyond the province of Assyria: he conquered Calneh with its territories in the Reign of Jerboam, Amos i. 1. vi. 2. & Isa. x. 8, 9. and invaded Israel in the Reign of Menahem, 2 King. xv. 19. but stayed not in the land, being bought off by Menahem for a thousand talents of silver: in his Reign therefore the Kingdom of Assyria was advanced on this side Tigris: for he was a great warrior, and seems to have conquered Haran, and Carchemish, and Reseph, and Calneh, and Thelasar, and might found or enlarge the city of Babylon, and build the old palace.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
7. Why did Iron Age civilizations have an advantage over Bronze Age civilizations?
https://www.quora.com/topic/Ancient-Civilizations?q=ancient%20civilizaztion
Nick Deakin, Interested in Minoan technology
Extracts:
They did not. Nor does the early iron offer any significant technical advantage over bronze, other than being able to arm more soldiers. This turns into a major issue in the Iron Age that lacked useful progress, it is not a constructive period generally.
Those suggesting Iron (1200 BCE) is superior are referred to later processes (700 BCE) and not Iron but steel, wootz steel. This represents the end of the IRON age. Early iron was weaker, heavier than bronze, it oxidises (rusts), its a poor tooling material and difficult to process, its takes the best metallurgists of the time to work out how to extract it and it is the poor(er) that used it.
To answer the question which is about these civilisations rather than the material properties. The iron age is the second least productive periods in human history (there are two with long-term contraction in outputs), the Iron age civilisations in the West did NOT have an advantage over the Bronze Age civilisations!
The iron age civilisations were generally at a disadvantage, as they have less of everything generally and have become cultures, not civilisations by the definition, many lost there writing systems (at least those in the West did around the Aegean). This is NOT a good period in human history.
... If we considered the Iron Age to be 1200-700 BCE, by the time the world recovered, the Iron Age was over! The later Greeks did get things back on track, then the Romans came along, with essentially iron age tactics and that was that!
Iron was first forged on Crete and Troy around 1250 BCE. These are the civilisations that know how to raise temperatures to process iron ore, look what happens next? All the civilisations in the region collapse. That included: the Mycenaeans, the islands (the Minoans), the Luwians (Trojans/Hittites), that-s all of the European civilisations and city-states at this time! They all had a more advanced society in the Bronze Age compared to what followed and arguable for the next 500 years, the entire Iron Age, many lost their writing systems and became cultures! The East was far less affected and perhaps slowed a little.
The iron age possibly occurred due to a disruption in the supply of tin, although pinpointing the exact cause has been a matter of scholarly debate. It has been described as the perfect storm, my own view is that there is insufficient data to definitely state what did occur. There is generally war, famine and displacement of people mostly around the Aegean, piracy at sea, what was production and trade being replaced with raiding and piracy. Iron may have somehow changed the (economic and military) regional dynamic for the WORST, everyone starts to raid and this tactic cascaded, ultimately resulting in collapse. Swords in the bronze age were owned by the elite ruling classes. No-one else could afford them, this is the issue, people with swords could take things rather than make things and it is this that seems to have occurred at least in the early iron age from around 1200-1000 BCE. The infrastructure and fabric of these civilisations collapsed, desperate times! You can call them Sea Peoples, but they came from lands that were once civilised, it is difficult to distinguish exact groups, but are more generally a loose confederation that attacks ports, many cities raised to the ground! Iron change society from being stable and productive (farming and trade) to unstable (raiding, famine and displacement of people), this is in the West, to be clear the East is less affected, but then again, it had a supply of tin.
This watershed research provides details of the goals and modus operandi of those involved in that clandestine plot.lthough there is less archaeology the further back in time, what does exist is telling, it shows there are very capable bronze age technologies that had much more in common with the age of enlightenment, 1687 (CE/AD). The Iron Age was a none event for technical progress. Iron is heavy, it is less strong than bronze, it demands high furnace temperatures to process, there is slag (impurities). It is however more abundant and evenly distributed, read cheap! The Minoans know about it from 1900 BCE (they had access to magnetite from Sykros) and did grade metals, the only thing they use it for is navigation (lodestone compass and kept that secret), it is not a good metal for tooling, they didn-t use it, its use is not much more than ceremonial and it is costly at this time (more so than gold). This was what they used from 1700 BCE, the first sword in bronze. The best metallurgists of this age, don-t develop Iron technology for tooling despite it being in their inventory, were they forced to use it? We don-t know why iron became relevant at this particular point in time, it is assumed that its the forging technologies that allowed iron to be used. What if it was purposefully NOT developed before, there are later Greek accounts, iron is banished from sacred sites, this is a very strange convention, it is associated with being less than noble?
Why is a metal stigmatised? Perhaps this is the memory of things lost. Before 1200 BCE, iron which is from meteoric sources is hugely expensive and used by the elites in society, after 1200 BCE it becomes the opposite end of the spectrum, some will not even allow it to be worn or it least is frowned upon! Why is there this perception?
See The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended, Isaac Newton. ... it will give you a pretty good idea of what is going on and why Newton is interested in this, he knows they had lodestones, metallurgy and he's likely found something, perhaps THE science and the technology he wants to explore.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^