11-12-2008, 01:23 PM
|
#11
|
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by neilgodfrey
Is it necessary to think that there really was a comet at all, any more than there was a sword shaped star sitting over a city, or that a cow gave birth to a sheep? If there really was a comet within 5 or so years of the event might not this be more coincidental than a clear referent?
Ancient and medieval historians seemed quite fond of routinely describing comets, earthquakes, miraculous portents of all kinds in relation to any notable death or destruction.
And when Josephus says this particular comet was remarkable for lasting an entire year, are we not entitled to think its provenance was more in rumour and popular suggestion than astronomical fact? Why seek a scientific kernel for this any more than we would seek one for the chariots in the sky or the lamb born of a cow?
Neil Godfrey
|
FWIW Suetonius also mentions an ominous comet at this time. Nero
Quote:
|
It chanced that a comet had begun to appear on several successive nights, a thing which is commonly believed to portend the death of great rulers. Worried by this, and learning from the astrologer Balbillus that kings usually averted such omens by the death of some distinguished man, thus turning them from themselves upon the heads of the nobles, he [Nero] resolved on the death of all the eminent men of the State; but the more firmly, and with some semblance of justice, after the discovery of two conspiracies.
|
Andrew Criddle
|
|
|
