[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

orion The "Chinese Connection"

Steven Goranson wrote, in part:

> "embarassing." I agree. For example, Altman wrote, "The historical records
> of Pliny and Philo, who wrote after A.D. 68..." Not to discuss Pliny again,
> let me note that Philo was dead by A.D. 68.  Or: "Now there is evidence

As an aside, let me say that I think it entirely possible that Philo lived
to just before his nephew left his post as governor of Alexandria and
Egypt to help with the siege of Jerusalem, and wrote a couple of things in
that period. This does not add any substance to Neil Altman's
innacuracies, although it is entirely possible that Neil picked up that
idea in conversation with me. :-{ 
(I think that I'm the one who referred Neil to Victor Mair back around
1990. It's hard to know how the ball will bounce.)

> other article: some of the quotes from Victor Mair, though from an
> unpublished report.  I wonder whether these are accurate, reflect his
> current views, and if he is willing to publish them. This theory still
> appears implausible to me, but Prof. Mair is a widely-published scholar of
> Chinese, I see from OCLC.  On OCLC I find one publication for Neil A.

I'll be lunching with Victor tomorrow, to get his updated "take" on these
issues. Apparently Neil Altman has been back in contact (via FAX)
recently, with another mysterious marginal marking, after being out of
touch for several years. So in the next few days, I'll try to get a
posting out on the current state of Victor Mair's views of the supposed
Chinese symbols. Perhaps this aspect of the discussion can be postponed
for that event? 

Have a great Labor Day weekend, if it is on your calendar!


Robert A. Kraft, Religious Studies, University of Pennsylvania