andrewcriddle

I'm not sure what A S-W was claiming exactly.

But according to Ronald Hutton as already cited.

In African society under Western administration or influence, we have both written records from Westerners and oral native African tradition, and hence can compare one with the other.

When dealing with facts that were when they happened known by everyone; African oral tradition is effectively accurate and reliable for 40 years, but after 120 years cannot distinguish between real history and sheer invention. The 40-120 year period is intermediate between these cases.

In ancient Athenian society knowlege of general political affairs was fairly accurate up to 50 years ago while knowledge of things particularly important to your family was fairly accurate up to nearly a hundred years ago. Beyond a hundred years Athenian family traditions seem to have mixed real events and sheer invention with sheer invention increasingly predominating as things became further and further in the past.

Andrew Criddle

Legend

Anti-Legend?

Why are all of you against me...

Sorry. Didn't want to ruin the seriousness in this thread. I just couldn't resist

Clivedurdle

I am really puzzled why anyone thinks there is any delay in legend development. It is immediate as far as I am concerned.

I once witnessed a car accident and had to give evidence in court. I gave the wrong colour for the car! It was useful my mistake did not matter because there was other evidence!

What is this forty years for two generations? May be true now, but technically 25 years is possible, and in any case, this is really about chinese whispers, with an awful amount of chinese whispering going on inside individual's heads as we continuously rewrite what we think happened to make it conform with our world view.

i am sorry ASW made some off the cuff asertions with no knowledge of how our brains work, how we perceive things, how we lay down memories, how we story tell to others. Legends are immediate.

Vorkosigan

Relax, man. You'll come into existence in about forty years or so.

gurugeorge

Showing that stories begin to distort and develop legendary qualities relatively quickly (e.g. 40 years) is a far cry from making it unproblematic that the first known texts about a supposedly historical figure (e.g. Paul's letters re. "Jesus") immediately show him as a divinity with hardly any historical features at all.

Steven Carr

Don't be silly. Of course it is.

After all a legend about how that particular book discusses the development of legends could not have grown up in just a few years.

It would take at least 2 generations for that legend to develop.

Steven Carr

I'm sure Richard Carrier wrote a devastating refutation of the use apologists make of Sherwin-White's words, but I cannot find it anywhere.

Matthew_Green

You know, I just thought of something. If S-W is still alive, perhaps we can write a letter to him about his statements on legend. We can even ask him if he endorses the way he has been used to discredit legends in the New Testament. That would be egg on the face of apologists like Craig and Habermas who are very fond of appealing to him. (I'm willing to write the letter if he is still alive and available for comment!)

Matthew

Matthew_Green

:rolling: That was good! I needed that bit of levity. You had me cracking up. (We're actually attacking your evil twin brother! We're going to nail him on identify theft! :Cheeky: )

Matthew

Matthew_Green

Actually, he will become notorious and well-known by then! :Cheeky:

Matthew