Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Still Waters

'Real site' of the Hanging Gardens of Babylon

15 posts in this topic

It is the only one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World for which the location has for centuries remained elusive.

Now, though, an academic from Oxford University believes she has solved one of the world’s last great archaeological mysteries by identifying the precise spot on which the Hanging Gardens of Babylon once stood.

http://www.telegraph...of-Babylon.html

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have I got this right?

After 20 years of research her conclusion of the site (which she hasnt been to) is;

"That's the best place for it to be. It looks like a good place for a garden."

Well, im convinced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have I got this right?

After 20 years of research her conclusion of the site (which she hasnt been to) is;

“That’s the best place for it to be. It looks like a good place for a garden."

Well, im convinced.

And...

The footage is the culmination of more than 20 years of research by Dr Dalley, from Oxford University’s Oriental Institute, to prove the correct location of the gardens.

So, she has worked on this 20 years and... "That's the best place for it to be. It looks like a good place for a garden.", is what she has to show for it. :cry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well from the tone of her article and prior knowledge, it is impossible in the political scale of things for her to excavate and prove her case. The middle east has always been know as a very secretive when it comes to their archeology.They hardly ever let outsiders dig and discover. Not to mention the violence still in the middle east.

It is sort of like the "god" particle, for years no one could prove it existed, only knew of it from the math of quantum physics. We only discovered the Higgs Bosin (spelling) last year, and people had been exploring that for well over 20 years. So I can see why people will be skeptical of "That's the best place for it to be. It looks like a good place for a garden." But people have to keep these factors in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit ridiculous don't you think, the hanging gardens of Babylon not being in Babylon?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People comment before doing any of their own research.

1.) "Babylon" was a common phrase that meant "Gate of the Gods" and was used PRIOR to the (more) famous city.

2.) King Sennacherib made references to his Garden of Babylon, whereas the Nebuchadnezzar made zero references to a garden.

3.) We get the idea of it being in Babylon because 1 scribe, Josephus, made the claim hundreds of years after the fact, likely due to the name confusion already pointed out.

*sigh*

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"With no archaeological evidence ever found for them, many have dismissed the gardens as a myth." I am always excited by anything new that can turn established academia on it's ear. I don't care for the author's use of the word "many" in place of something more descriptive (by 'many' does he mean my Aunt Marge and her book club?), but he does hint at the idea that academia gets an idea in it's head that seems plausible and then cements it in place as fact.

Come to think of it, Aunt Marge has quite a bit of common sense and would likely get along famously with Dr. Dalley :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything "might" be possible but it would take a lot more than what I have read to take her decision of the location just like a bluff in poker and probably not that convincing. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People comment before doing any of their own research.

1.) "Babylon" was a common phrase that meant "Gate of the Gods" and was used PRIOR to the (more) famous city.

2.) King Sennacherib made references to his Garden of Babylon, whereas the Nebuchadnezzar made zero references to a garden.

3.) We get the idea of it being in Babylon because 1 scribe, Josephus, made the claim hundreds of years after the fact, likely due to the name confusion already pointed out.

*sigh*

And we probably know much more thousands of years later than Josephus did hundreds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Um, I won't be going to get my own self murdered, but I'll pay you to walk into a war torn area and take footage of a site I want to believe is the location of an ancient treasury, even though the name of the treasury itself should guide you to the actual location where it once was..." -Sounds like someone way to willing to play with other peoples lives for absolutely no good reason at all, but that's just my way of reading it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A bit ridiculous don't you think, the hanging gardens of Babylon not being in Babylon?"

Almost as ridiculous as Leeds castle not being in Leeds ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the doc and while the speculation was backed by good deductive reasoning methinks Channel 4 put this out too early and with a misleading title. Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is confusion that myth and legend is the same as fairy tale, tall tales and fireside stories. When in reality they are distorted truth. As the old saying goes where there smoke there is fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is confusion that myth and legend is the same as fairy tale, tall tales and fireside stories. When in reality they are distorted truth. As the old saying goes where there smoke there is fire.

The only confusion is in believing that myths and legends are the same thing. They're not.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@OverSword

I hope that's not sarcasm.

We do know more because 1.) We have archaeology & more access to historical accounts to get a more complete picture. 2.) Being a non-royal scribe during his time period was equivalent to being a gossip recorder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.