these articles are not exactly new, but they are new to me. it seems that the great pyramid of giza in egypt may not be the worlds tallest pyramid. bosnian-american pyramid buff semir "sam" osmanagic in bosnia has suspected that a four-sided hill in a valley 30 kilometres from sarajevo was none other than a pyramid. nonetheless western scientists are calling it a hoax. although he is ridiculed, osmanagic believes they come from a 12,000 year old civilzation in ancient bosnia. to this day the dig continues...CHECK OUT::
and this... two history scholars from england have raised evidence that "william shakespeare" was an alias for sir henry neville, an english courtier and diplomat. they say that shakespeare's (or shoud i say, neville's) plays have a distinct similarity in the journeys and experiences of neville to france, as well as his ancestory and use of language.
CHECK OUT::
its very welcomed for stories like this to pop up, although they can be quite shocking. could it be that history is not always what it appears to be in the history books? could it be that information and facts were left out for lack of better knowledge, or maybe even for ulterior motives dare i imagine? it seems clear that what we know as history is not always truthful or factual for that matter. could it be that if beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then history could be in the pen of a writer?
is it quite convenient that the bosnian pyramids (maybe...) and shoddy shakespeare (could be...) do not carry the same weight as, lets say ... religion (debatable...) or dare i say, the absoluteness of the holocaust (evidence is available...) although there are some places where questioning the last two could end you up worse for wear. what are they afraid of? why do they need laws to protect their truths? no one is jailed for saying the sky is green... so why be jailed for saying a certain event never happened or a certain idea is false? once the right to question is gone, you have to question whether you have any rights at all.
what i can draw from this is that when the right information is lost, ignored, or worse discarded; the wrong can seem right to those who have placed their faith in historians. and if there are ulterior motives behind the ink in the history books, what we know very quickly becomes what we think we know, and then what is not true. and we realize that all along our naiveness has benefited the elite against society that feels they are innocent or less so.
No comments:
Post a Comment