←back to thread

In Jordan, a ‘stunning’ discovery under Petra’s ancient stone

(www.nytimes.com)
75 points aguaviva | 1 comments | 14 Oct 24 18:46 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
lubujackson ◴[15 Oct 24 00:27 UTC] No.41843700[source]▶
Not to get all Indiana Jonesy about it, but 12 skeletons? From right around year 0? And they even show a picture of a weathered, ceramic cup?

The article plays it straight, but I'm pretty sure this = Holy Grail confirmed.

replies(9): >>41843745 #>>41851333 #>>41851660 #>>41851807 #>>41851862 #>>41851898 #>>41852588 #>>41852754 #>>41853822 #
Telemakhos ◴[15 Oct 24 18:10 UTC] No.41851333[source]▶
The article says the skeletons date to 400-100 BC, so, no. Year 0 doesn't exist (1 BC is followed directly by AD 1), and the holy grail would have to date from AD 33 or so, because Jesus didn't die in the year of his birth.
replies(3): >>41851539 #>>41851667 #>>41851680 #
SoftTalker ◴[15 Oct 24 18:36 UTC] No.41851667[source]▶
How accurately can skeletons be dated? Within 100 years? 10 years? a year?
replies(1): >>41851929 #
1. kelnos ◴[15 Oct 24 18:59 UTC] No.41851929{3}[source]▶
They didn't actually date the skeletons, because they haven't excavated the site to physically examine them. The time range given by the article is just from the date the city was founded, until it was annexed by the Romans.

It's a pretty safe assumption that they were buried there before the Roman annexation. My guess would be they were buried much closer to 400 BC than to AD 106.