Morten St George Theory

[-JKP-]

YOU are a cherry-picker. You pick ONE example from the 6th century that is OUT OF CHARACTER with the other examples from the 6th century and then you use that as an example to negate all the rest? That is preposterous.

I cherry-picked that Sagittarius drawing for a reason. As I have been saying, the encryption wheels on You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. may have been influenced by Merkabah mysticism of the first millennium, which in turn could have some connection to that Hebrew Sagittarius found in Israel. Thus, though distant in time and place, the two Sagittarii may be connected.



In both cases I see a bloke wearing a skirt, some type of headgear, comfortable footwear, and drawn arrow ready to fire. It is easy enough to imagine an evolution from A to B across six or seven centuries.

You date it to the 6th century. Do you have a precise date for it? I have reasons to believe that it would have been more likely to appear during the 7th century.

The fact that it has legs is IRRELEVANT to a conversation about which zodiacs have the largest number of figures that match the VMS. The Beit Alpha mosaics do not pass this test. Plus, it has been covered over for centuries and has only recently been re-discovered. Secondly, I did COMBINATION searches on groups of thematic patterns, which is FAR more important than picking out a single example.

You didn't even pick a good example. The Beit Alpha Sagittarius does NOT have a long-tailed cap, does NOT have wide sleeves, does NOT have pleats, does NOT have bootlaces, and does NOT have a crossbow.

You are a cherry-picker. You CANNOT do good research by picking ONLY the one that suits your purposes (one that isn't even very similar) and ignore the rest. That is what you are doing.


That's not research. That's simply pleasing yourself and reaffirming your own assumptions.