Change of language is a separate, though somewhat related issue, and Loborubro does the reader a disservice by trying to create confusion on this point. Taking quotes out of context Usenet-style, then going "huh" as s/he does, does not constitute a valid form of counter-argument. Whether this list considers this to be "civil" or not, I must highly object to the practice of breaking the chain of argument in the reader's mind through this sort of selective editing, as one tries to bluff the reader into believing that no such chain of argument was present before the edit, hoping that said reader will not remember what he saw earlier. Any honest argument seeks to fully engage the faculties of the reader. It is a shameful act to do the reverse.

> .. And the Deities of southern Europe are basically
> .. indo-european, at least the most important
> .. of Them all - both Jupiter and Zeus.

Um, no. Which of these three would you consider to be a good substitute for Zeus - Vishnu, Shiva or Brahma? OK, so both Olympianism and Hinduism have a sort of trinity. What of it? So does Christianity, and nobody seriously argues that its trinity should be equated with some imaginary universal "Indo-European" trinity on that basis. So, if "God the Father" is Zeus, which would "the Holy Spirit" be? Poseidon or Hades?

Lets look at the other Olympians. Aphrodite clearly isn't an "Indo-European" divinity, as much as some Neopagans would love to equate her with the Norse goddess Frigg. One can see an intermediate form "Aphrodite the Warrior" in surviving art. A far more plausible and widely accepted parallel is to be found in the very "non-Indo-European" goddess Ishtar. Hera has been attributed to the pre-hellenic population of Greece, as I recall, ... I could go on.

Aryan purity in Greece? I think not.

Loborubro writes:

> .. > .. Earlier, the Hyksos ruling Egypt, Egyptianized
> .. > .. during their period of rule, Egypt did not
> .. > .. become noticeably Asian).
> .. > ..

> .. Did Egypt adopted the Hyksos' language? And the
> .. Hyksos Gods as head of their pantheon?

which, again, is neither here nor there, as it is a willful attempt to mislead the reader as to which point is being argued, through quotation out of context, a practice rightly condemned in all legitimate academic circles. The issues addressed in the passage quoted by Loborubro, was that of the richness of the culture of the Nomadic people (the Hyksos) vs. that of the long settled people (the Egyptians), and the likeliness of the settled people adopting the culture of the nomads. One would not guess this from the quotes left in place.

Again, Loborubro becomes guilty of circular argumentation. The very point that s/he uses to establish this intermediate point along the way, is the one that s/he is trying to establish : the alleged "Indo-European" extraction of the Romans and their gods. The tone s/he has used in subsequent posts, in which s/he refers to the validity of this hypothesis as a "fact", merely reinforces the recognition that what we are seeing, here, is what fundamentalist Christians would call "presumptive logic" - the willingness to distort reason through the reinterpretation of all facts, in light of a preconceived position.

It is the polar opposite of legitimate scholarship. One couldn't refer to it in gentle terms and retain one's academic integrity, because the reality that is revealed is an intrinsically unkind one.

OK, where did you come in from?

1. The index page for this subdirectory
2. The ReligioRomana archives, via the Loborubo page