Destruction of Pompei is 1631 year.

Quelques auteurs, tels que Ignarra et Laporte-Dutheil, ont avancé que Pompéi n'avait pas disparu dans l'éruption de 79 et que, réparée, elle avait encore subsisté jusqu'à l'an 471,

That's about all I could find in your link.

Pliny in the book does not result any dates. Who the first has told, that Pliny veins in 61-103 years?

(It is 18 century. MASSON, J. Plinius II junioris vita ordine chronologico sic digesta, (...). Amst., Janssonius-Van Waesbergen, 1709)

Edited by elcano, : No reason given.

“Excavation began in the 18th century, when all memory of the existence of Herculaneum had been lost for centuries and the only available reports of it were those that had come down through the authors of antiquity, without any information as to the exact position of the ancient city.”

So what? After many years and buried evidence, someone wnated to see if Pliny was telling the truth.

elcano writes: After eruption 79 years have forgotten about these cities, at all did not know their site.

They didn't know exactly where they were, so what? They looked and they found out.

Why these cities are present on maps of 16 -17 centuries?

What maps? Show me one. There are many kinds of maps, including maps of where people THOUGHT ancient cities were.

Nous voyons cependant reparaître les noms de Pompéi, d'Herculanum et de Stabies dans des ouvrages bien antérieurs à leur découverte. On lit dans l'histoire écrite au IXe siècle par le moine Martin qu'en 838, Sicard, prince de Bénévent, campa avec son armée in Pompeio campo qui a Pompeia urbe Campanie nunc deserta nomen accepit. Dès 1488, Niccolo Perotto fait mention de ces villes dans sa Cornucopia ; Sannazar parle de Pompéi dans son Arcadia (Prosa, XII), dont la première édition parut en 1504 ; dans la carte d'Ambrogio Leone, 1513, on trouve marqué au lieu qu'occupe Portici Herculaneum Oppidum ; Leandro Alberti (Descrizione di tutta l'Italia, 1561) rappelle les villes d'Herculanum, de Pompéi et de Stabies, ensevelies par le Vésuve, indiquant le site où à cette époque on croyait qu'elles avaient existé ; dans l'Historia Neapolitana de Giulio Cesare Capaccio, publiée en 1607, on lit un chapitre consacré aux antiquités d'Herculanum ; Camillo Pellegrino (Apparato alle antichità di Capua, 1651) dit, en parlant de la ville d'Herculanum, qu'on pense qu'elle occupait le site actuel de la Torre del Greco ; le dictionnaire géographique de Baudran, 1682, mentionne les villes détruites ; en 1688, Francesco Bolzano publiait l'Antico Ercolano ovvero la Torre del Greco tolta dall' obblio, plaçant, il est vrai, Herculanum dans un lieu tout différent du véritable ; enfin en 1689, une fouille faite sur l'emplacement de Pompéi fit trouver quelques fragments de serrures et une pierre où on lisait le mot POMPEI ; seulement on en conclut que là se trouvait une villa de Pompée.

http://www.mediterranees.net/voyageurs/pompeia/intro/Intro9.html

elcano writes: Pliny in the book does not result any dates.

When do you think Pompei was destroyed?

In your link the OUTDATED historian M. Breton talks about some clues to how he knew where to look for Pompei. It doesn't have anything to do with the dates.

There are very few here who can read French. The working language here is some form of English.

Since you can read it please supply the translation or don't post it.

The next post that isn't useful to the majority of members will produce a 24 hour suspension for you.

Thanks.

Pliny in the book does not result any dates/

He says in his second letter to Tacitus that he was eighteen at the time of the eruption.

Me have plenty of other biographical information about Pliny to know that this was in 79 AD; he was a very prominent figure of his time, even rising to the height of serving as Consul in the year 100.

elcano writes: In 18 century it has been solved, that Pompeii were lost in 79 year. However in 19 century there were doubts in such date. http://www.mediterranees.net/voyageurs/pompeia/intro/Intro9.html

The website you cite expresses no doubts about the dating of Pompeii. Where it mentions alternative dating it does so only to reject such proposals. For example, this is from the page preceding the one you cite (translated from the French):

http://www.mediterranees.net/voyageurs/pompeia/intro/Intro9.html:

Some authors, such as Ignarra and Laporte-Dutheil, have advanced that Pompéi had not disappeared in the eruption from 79 and that, repaired, it had still remained until year 471, when another earthquake would have definitively destroyed it; they are based on the fact that Pompéi is still on the chart of Peutinger carried out in Constantinople at the end of the 4th century; but they forgot a quite important fact which destroys their system completely: it is that, so far, in the ruins of Pompéi, one did not find a single medal posterior with the reign of Titus and year 79. If the name of Pompéi still exists on the chart of Peutinger, it is that part of its inhabitants had raised at some distance from the destroyed city a borough which undoubtedly had taken the name of it.

The excavated city of Pompeii reveals a 1st century Roman town in terms of architecture, religion, pottery, tools, etc. The language found on buildings, sculptures, documents, etc., is Latin, not Italian. Latin was already a dead language by the time of your claimed 17th century date, and even the website you cite rejects an earlier 4th century date.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Correct language.

We however see reappearing the names of Pompéi, Herculanum and Stabies in works quite former to their discovery. One reads in the history written in IXe century by the Martin monk that in 838, Sicard, prince de Bénévent, camped with its army in Pompeio campo which has Pompeia urbe Campania nunc deserted nomen accepit. Since 1488, Niccolo Perotto mentions these city in its Cornucopia; Sannazar speaks about Pompéi in its Arcadia (Prosa, XII), whose first edition appeared in 1504; in the chart of Ambrogio Leone, 1513, one finds marked with the place that Portici Herculaneum Oppidum occupies; Leandro Alberti (Descrizione di tutta Italia, 1561) points out the towns of Herculanum, Pompéi and Stabies, buried by Vesuvius, indicating the site where at that time it was BELIEVED that they had existed;

My caps there...ha, even this translation is whacky.

I don't know if he reads French either, as this is only an account of possible excavation sites.

Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

did you use babelfish?

quote:

---

We however see reappearing the names of Pompéi, Herculanum and Stabies in works quite former to their discovery. One reads in the history written in IXe century by the Martin monk that in 838, Sicard, prince de Bénévent, camped with its army in Pompeio campo which has Pompeia urbe Campania nunc deserta nomen accepit. Since 1488, Niccolo Perotto makes mention of these cities in its Cornucopia; Sannazar speaks about Pompéi in its Arcadia (Prosa, XII), whose first edition appeared in 1504; in the chart of Ambrogio Leone, 1513, one finds marked with the place that Portici Herculaneum Oppidum occupies; Leandro Alberti (Descrizione di tutta Italia, 1561) points out the towns of Herculanum, Pompéi and Stabies, buried by Vesuvius, indicating the site where at that time one believed that they had existed; in Historia Neapolitana de Giulio Cesare Capaccio, published in 1607, one reads a chapter devoted to antiquities of Herculanum; Camillo Pellegrino (Apparato alle antichità di Capua, 1651) known as, while speaking about the town of Herculanum, which one thinks that it occupied the current site of Torre del Greco; the gazetteer of Baudran, 1682, mentions the destroyed cities; in 1688, Francesco Bolzano published Antico Ercolano ovvero Torre del Greco tolta dall' obblio, admittedly placing Herculanum in a place very different from true; finally in 1689, an excavation made on the site of Pompéi made find some fragments of locks and a stone where word POMPEI was read; only one concludes from it that there was a villa of Pumped.

---

color for emphasis. ... reads a lot like elcano ...

I like the last one :D. I agree that this refers to the cities as destroyed and to their likely locations

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Today there is all the bases even more to doubt of date offered in 18 century. Those facts, that I have resulted directly show, that date 79 year has no serious substantiations.

You're kidding, right? You claim in your last sentence above that there is no substantiation for an eruption of Vesuvius that buried a city named Pompeii, but in the same post provide such substantion:

79, 24th August-Mount Vesuvius erupts burying Pompeii to a depth of 5 to 6 metres and Herculaneum to a depth of 10 metres 1748-First systematic excavations at the hill then known merely as 'Civita' (later to be identified as Pompeii) 1763, 20th August-Inscription excavated proving that the buried town is Pompeii http://www.classics.cam.ac.uk/Pompeii/pompeii.html

I could not discern whether or not your claim that doubts surfaced in the 19th century regarding the date or the town's name because I do not speak French fluently (incidentally, do you speak French?), although I caught the drift of the article based on what little I have retained from high school. I am thinking based the sequence you provided that the link explores the possibility of the town not actually being named Pompeii which would mean absolutely nothing as it pertains to the documented eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79CE.

{ABE: I just read Percy's translation. Your link explores no such possibility and I am now thinking that you have a limited fluency in one or more of the Romance languages and pick out phrases or words from documents you do not understand to "support" your wild claim that Pompeii was not destroyed by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79CE. Thanks for the translation, Percy!}

To help your argument along, it would be a good idea to provide links to pages in English.

Edited by Jaderis, : No reason given.

What facts confirm destruction Pompeii and Herculaneum in 79 year? Such facts is not available. There are only incorrectly dating archeological finds.

Incorrectly dating archeological finds?

Here's a link to the Levin photographic archives at the University of Virginia.

Archival Photograph Project

Would you please choose any picture and explain, in detail, how it is an example of seventeenth century architecture and not from the first.

Or perhaps you can find some other evidence...a link to a seventeenth century artifact found at the site. Perhaps a mechanical clock or a pair of eyeglasses. A picture of someone in seventeenth century clothes...anything. Perhaps you can show me one of the inscriptions on the site written in seventeenth century Italian instead of first century Latin.

The evidence that this is a first century site is overwhelming. It's painfully obvious that your position is unresearched, wrong and just plain silly.

---

When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data.
- Henry Morris, Head of Institute for Creation Research

RAZD writes: did you use babelfish?

I just googled the name 'Sicard, prince of Benevent' and found the reference by the author Breton which elcano cited. Looks like we both got the same whacy one;

One reads in the history written in IXe century by the Martin monk that in 838, Sicard, prince de Bénévent, camped with its army

I have done a little browsing and found that elcano's idea was part of a larger picture, i.e.,finding the 'real' Mount Sinai. It has something to do with 'history revision' and establishing a new chronology of the world ala Anatoly Fomenko;

History; Science or Fiction? writes: The fact that many Biblical texts clearly refer to volcanic activity has been well known to historians for a long time. The word Zion is widely known; theologians interpret it as “pillar”. Identifying Zion as Sinai and Horeb is common in both theology and Bible studies. The rational person shall however try to think of what the Biblecould really be referring to? Volcanoes? But there aren’t any active volcanoes anywhere in the Middle East – nor Northern Africa, nor most of continental Europe, for that matter. However, there is an exception – Italy and the famous Vesuvius. It is at a considerable distance from Palestine, granted. But let us make the heretical presumption that the real events that became reflected in the book we know as the Bible really took place elsewhere, despite of what the illustrations in the modern bibles are telling us.

There is a shift from Fomenko's idea of Vesuvius being Sinai, to Aetna being Sinai.

It is somehow contingent on proving that Vesuvius erupted only once or that Pliny was either fictitious or referring to a different volcano?

I am better at finding the clues than analyzing them, and much of the material in the links is poorly translated as well...so feel free to fill in the missing gaps.

RAZD writes: did you use babelfish? I just googled the name 'Sicard, prince of Benevent' and found the reference by the author Breton which elcano cited. Looks like we both got the same whacy one;

I used the original quote and ran it through the babelfish translator

http://world.altavista.com/

google also offers "translate this page" on many foreign language sites.

There is a shift from Fomenko's idea of Vesuvius being Sinai, to Aetna being Sinai.

So we are dealing with a cult that believes everything we know is false. Not just science but recorded history as well.

:rolleyes:

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.