UFOs in Works of Art

No, your whole argument is based on supposition, and wild supposition at that. The portions of my presentation that offer an alternative explanation of this passage of text are speculative, and labeled as such.

The events leading up to the Fall of Jerusalem are accepted as history and the passage that looks like a possible UFO sighting in the Josephus text is self evident.

No matter what you want to make of the work of Josephus, there is no way that an eight+ year old account of an, at best, urban legend represents proof of a UFO sighting. It's really that simple. We can ping-pong these points back and forth forever, but nothing is going to change that fact.

I never said the passage is Proof of anything simply that it represents what we would have considered a UFO sighting in a Historical account.

Maybe that is the case. Such a thing cannot be determined from the material available. You sure seem willing to explore alternative explanations for the supernatural descriptions that don't conform to your theory. Which I suppose is anything that doesn't happen in the sky. Why is it you are willing to assume chicanery on the part of the Temple priests but not on Flavius Josephus with his known and heavily apparent agenda?

I already suggested in an earlier post that the sighting might have had an astronomical explanation just like a large percentage of Modern day UFO sightings do.

From the Old testament we have a long history of Miracles happening in the Temple. Obviously Heifers don't birth Lambs, but that doesn't mean this was not a "Miracle" that helped galvanize Israel against Roman Authority.


Did the Jews see signs and miracles that they thought were signaling the coming Messiah?

If not , then maybe Josephus' account is a work of fiction.

If so , then there is no reason for Josephus to make this stuff up. Halley's Comet seems to suggest they did see signs and portents.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Just because Josephus thinks that the Messianic prophesy related to Vespasian means nothing. l_s

Actually it is quite critical to understanding why he employed the passage.

No the "Signs and portents" are critical to understanding the actions of the Zealots and Nationalists. Josephus blames them for the destruction of Jerusalem and the Signs and portents explain the intense Zealotry and why the Nationalist feelings were so high directly preceding the uprising, because they were seen as fulfillment of Messianic Prophesy. It is no secret that the Jews thought the Messianic Prophesy was being fulfilled.

Why do the supposed UFO time lines never present the context of this account?

I didn't write them so how should I know. I honestly don't know which time lines you are referring to anyway.

Does not your own avatar suggest that we deny ignorance?

Yes, but looking at the UFO issue in terms of Black and White , and what we can definitively Prove ,is not what I consider denying Ignorance. You said you were working this thread off an outline so , we don't agree on this case let's move on to your outline and I will keep an open mind and listen to what you are saying. Sound fair enough?

Originally posted by lost_shaman
The events leading up to the Fall of Jerusalem are accepted as history and the passage that looks like a possible UFO sighting in the Josephus text is self evident.

Look, both of us are glossing over large areas of complexities involved in the work of Flavius Josephus. He's a controversial figure to say the least but extremely important as a preserver of Jewish history. There are many portions of the "Jewish War" that are accepted as history, because they have been corroborated by the archeological record and other sources. This cannot be said of the section dealing with portents and omens preceding the war. The more I research the issue the less I think Flavius Josephus fabricated the account of the chariots and armies in the sky out of whole cloth. It doesn't seem to be his style. It still falls short of being a positive historical UFO sighting for many reasons, the primary one being the span of time between the supposed event was witnessed compared to when it was recorded, which now looks to be a lapse as great as 13 to 16 years. It is not self-evident as you suggest. It is perhaps lost_shaman-evident but that is not the same thing as Cicada-evident, obviously. I still don't think the cities are meant to be additional objects in the sky and not the cities on the ground. Many scholars find the 1737 William Whiston translation, which is the one we are largely using, to be unsatisfactory and I find it reads as rather vague. Here's how this passage is presented by Eusebius of Caesarea:

And not many days after the feast, on the twenty-first of the month Artemisium, a certain marvelous vision was seen which passes belief. The prodigy might seem fabulous were it not related by those who saw it, and were not the calamities which followed deserving of such signs. For before the setting of the sun chariots and armed troops were seen throughout the whole region in mid-air, wheeling through the clouds and encircling the cities.Wikipedia

The objectives and limitations of Eusebius aside, his interpretation does present a different, fuller image then that of Whiston. For easy reference, here's the Whiston version again:

Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
I never said the passage is Proof of anything simply that it represents what we would have considered a UFO sighting in a Historical account.

In your above quote alone you say that the passage looks like a possible UFO is self-evident. I suppose the use of possible is the key word and the self-evident is just poetic license? Is it any wonder I'm having confusion deciphering your shifting argument? If by "we" you just mean you, then you are correct. Otherwise this statement is false. If it isn't proof then it is only possibility, and remote possibility at that. You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
I already suggested in an earlier post that the sighting might have had an astronomical explanation just like a large percentage of Modern day UFO sightings do.

Believe me, I'm all about mythological accounts being based upon astronomical observation, but I don't see how that applies to this account. I already asked in an earlier post what astronomical event looks like armies of men and chariots in the sky?

Originally posted by lost_shaman
From the Old Testament we have a long history of Miracles happening in the Temple. Obviously Heifers don't birth Lambs, but that doesn't mean this was not a "Miracle" that helped galvanize Israel against Roman Authority.

You're reading this completely wrong. This is not how Josephus presents the signs and omens, as factors that galvanized the Jewish resistance. He presents them as moments of prophecy foreshadowing the will of God, which the Jewish populace ignored. Again you choose and interpret the portions of Josephus that you feel fit your argument, and then justify and explain those portions that do not.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Did the Jews see signs and miracles that they thought were signaling the coming Messiah?

If not , then maybe Josephus' account is a work of fiction.

If so , then there is no reason for Josephus to make this stuff up. Halley's Comet seems to suggest they did see signs and portents.

I agree. They did see signs and portents. They saw Halley's Comet (and recognized it as a comet), and read it as an ill omen. I doubt they knew exactly what it was an ill omen of, that's a luxury Josephus had in applying the omen to an event many years after the fact (see how that works?). As there is no other single source for the account besides Josephus it is possible he just made it up. It is likewise possible he drew it from a type of urban legend. I think the latter is possible and you think it is a certainty. I have no problem with that. Regardless of that, I still think you're misreading the manner in which the omen occurred.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
No the "Signs and portents" are critical to understanding the actions of the Zealots and Nationalists. Josephus blames them for the destruction of Jerusalem and the Signs and portents explain the intense Zealotry and why the Nationalist feelings were so high directly preceding the uprising, because they were seen as fulfillment of Messianic Prophesy. It is no secret that the Jews thought the Messianic Prophesy was being fulfilled.

Wrong. Was it the zealots and nationalists who collected and encoded the signs and portents? No, of course not. It was Josephus. You still seem to think that Josephus was some perfect chronicler of fact, but he wasn't. The signs have nothing to do with the feelings of nationalism other then that the zealotry (a hyperbolic manner of stereotyping used to describe the irrational state of an enemy to this day, as said propaganda) caused them to ignore the warnings of God made manifest through the omens.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
I didn't write them so how should I know. I honestly don't know which time lines you are referring to anyway.

No kidding you didn't write them, they're all over the web. What you did do was offer them up as proof (possible proof? possibly self-evident proof?) of your point of view without doing a scrap of research on them until pressed by me to do so. You obviously know of at least one time line because as you just said, you didn't write it yourself (didn't source it either), but it is word for word the same as dozens of UFO history timelines, in multiple languages. Do a Google search and see for yourself. Here are just a few examples:

The Reptilian Agenda: UFOs Through the Ages
A Brief UFO History
UFO Sightings: Close Encounters of the Ancient Kind
0-1900A.D. History of the World
The Bible UFO Connection - UFOs in History

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Yes, but looking at the UFO issue in terms of Black and White , and what we can definitively Prove ,is not what I consider denying Ignorance. You said you were working this thread off an outline so , we don't agree on this case let's move on to your outline and I will keep an open mind and listen to what you are saying. Sound fair enough?

Talk about creating a caricature. Because I do not draw the same conclusion of you does not mean I view the issue in terms of black and white. You're so much more comfortable taking shots in the general realm, aren't you. I'm not even really that much of a hard case, I do and have made allowances for remote possibilities absent of proof. But the contention that this is a historic UFO sighting does not hold up to scrutiny. I actually think I presented the material in question in a manner that allows for far more gradated evaluation then your copy and paste from the UFO timeline.

But please let us move on. I'm losing my life to this argument and I have other matters to attend to. I will endeavor to be more accommodating of your concept as much as I am able.


As this was always intended to be a visually oriented presentation and the present topic has not included pictorial elements, here are some images from versions of the "Jewish War". The first is a woodcut print illustration of the siege that includes the figures in the sky (an inaccurate image compared to the text but interesting to see nonetheless).



This oneis about the comet but seems to include the armies in the sky as well:



Both images found on the:
The Preterist Archives

I would cite these illustrations better if I could but the site provides almost no information on them. The former apparently comes from a 1719 edition printed in Boston. (Note: In case it is not apparent I am not a Preterist, or a theological believer in any way, and I am not advocating their point of view).

Here's a good analysis of the signs and portents and additional information on the timing and origins of the described events from The Flavius Josephus Home Page

Comment
These astounding tales apparently circulated among Jews after the war and were then collected by Josephus. They show the need of the populace to make sense of the destruction as well as Josephus' own interest in prophecy, which he uses here to indicate to his non-Jewish readers that the Temple and the City were not burned at the whim of the conquering Romans but were deliberately allowed, if not destined, to be destroyed by the Deity.
The omens fall into interesting groups. The star and comet always accompany momentous events; one recalls the comet presaging the death of Julius Caesar and the star at the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. The other omens are associated with Jewish festivals. The next six signs that are described occur within days of each other, in an unspecified year, but probably in the early 60s. Just before the Passover celebration three of these signs occur together, and just after it the chariots in the air appear. Fifty days after this same Passover, on Shavuot (Pentecost), the earthquake and strange sounds occur. And Jesus ben Ananias first makes his appearance at the festival of Sukkot.
One notes that Passover is a spring festival, and Sukkot an autumn one, suggesting that these all occurred within the same year, which, by the clues given (Albinus as procurator, the duration of Jesus' lamentation), would have been 62. As it happens, Josephus was most likely in Rome in that year, not in Jerusalem (see the Chronology), so he is forced to report these signs at second hand.

The analysis goes on to discuss the parallels to prophecies found in the New Testament.

mod edit to use "ex" instead of "quote"
Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**


[edit on 12-1-2006 by sanctum]

People make lists. Sue them.

You keep saying I can't prove this or that . I never made an argument that I could. I didn't say I could prove anything on this thread.

This is what I said back on page one.

My point was that people have seen these strange things in the sky's for centuries and its completely logical to think they have been depicted in some works of Art.

Here are a few examples.

Now that you have shown examples of art from Josephus' account it seems you've proven what I said.

I still think that Josephus is likely recording the signs and portents that actually influenced the Jews idea of the fulfillment of Messianic prophesy.

It was a good debate though, I'm also tired of arguing about it.




[edit on 11-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

Today I happened to be watching National Geographic , one of the recently produced shows about the life and times of Jesus, and a professor was talking about the nuances of English to Aramaic translations. He said something very interesting that applies to our discussion here.

He said that the Aramaic language does not have words for colors. So if you wanted to say something was Green in Aramaic , you would have said something is Plantlike.

Now if we apply this to the words of the Josephus Text it makes more sense.

If we take "chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor ", or "In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering armour" , it looks more like a color description in Aramaic.

Now it makes even more sense for the Jews speaking Aramaic at the time to have seen something like "UFOs" and described them in this way.

I thought this was the case already , but I did not know that Aramaic did not have words for colors.


Here is a whole Rabbinical breakdown for a color translation of "Green/turquoise".

www.yhol.org.il...

On Wool, Linen, and Goats


The list of donations continues in the fourth verse with the following item: "tchelet-turquoise wool..."(25 :4). Rashi explains that this is wool dyed with the blood of a chilazon. Its color is green. It is generally true that tchelet is a color dye which comes from the chilazon.

Continues...

[edit on 11-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

Cicade:

My snide remarks were actually an attempt to offer an insight.

Doesn’t mean it was a Good one, or that you should look at it or ponder it or anything *shrugs* just an offer.

As an aside, here's something you said in another post:

"The simple fact remains that we do not know many things about the history of the world and if we're afraid to make leaps of intuition we'll never learn anything at all. It's boring and crowded swimming in the shallow side of the pool. Personally I'd rather dive into the deep end. "

Pretty groovy philosophy, that. One of the reasons I like reading yer stuff...


rock on
twj

[edit on 11-1-2006 by torbjon]

Originally posted by torbjon
I AM having a conversation only with myself… unless, of course, someone chooses to reply. If a person is incapable of ignoring me, there is a button they can click and the system will ignore me for them *shrugs*

I wasn't offended or anything. I was only kidding. You know solipsism? The belief that only one's self can be known to exist with any certainty? I haven't ignored anyone on ATS yet and I've certainly had worse things said to me.

Originally posted by torbjon
you get to this point

where you just sorta….

Stop.

Curious that.

I wonder why that is?

Is there nothing else to be learned about the subject? Is that Really all that there is?

Hey, I'm just one person working on my own on this endeavor between work and home duties and other areas of research, creativity and recreation. I figure five to ten paragraphs is about as much as the average person is going to spend on most art history subjects. I know from experience that most ATS members do not go for reading long posts, and I know my posts are all ready way more than long enough. If I have ever given the impression that the material I'm presenting is the sum of any of these pieces of art (with the exception of the jeton which frankly got more attention than it deserved) it wasn't my intention. They have this great show on the Ovation network "The Private Life of a Masterpiece" where they examine the history and details of a single painting for a full hour. Even with that time frame they still only scratch the surface. I've made a commitment to talk about a large number of pieces, and if I'm going to be able to do that I have to keep my conversation focused on the subject at hand. Believe me I have theories and concepts about certain figures and movements in art history that would make mainstream academic art historians squirm in their seats and clear their throats uncomfortably. I'm all about alternative explanations of symbolism, the layering of disparate symbols to create new connotations, deliberate argots, and other examinations of esoteric readings of popular art works. One thing I don't have any stomach for, as an artist and an art historian, is someone misconstruing an image deliberately or otherwise. Especially when it's done without even attaching the artist's name to the work. That's just disrespectful. I see a lot in these paintings that I don't go into because it isn't pertinent. If you think I have a responsibility to present a converse argument to my own findings, you’re wrong. I'm not a journalist. This thread is reactionary to an already well-represented point of view

The other side of this is that if anyone else wants to present material on the works in question or a different point of view then I would love that. That's what I was looking for. lost_shaman is doing this. I don't fully agree with him, but we both obviously went to great pains to make our points and learned a lot in the process. I'm up to my ears with information about the slippery Flavius Josephus that I never even suspected that I would want to know. These are my findings with the time and space I'm willing to commit to them. If you have more to say, say it.

Originally posted by torbjon
Or are you afraid that if you continue a line of inquiry you might turn up some evidence that gives you pause for thought?

No image from a work of art is going to give me pause for thought on this subject. Let's not forget the topic at hand. This is a thread in the Aliens & UFOs forum. I have fundamental difficulties with the concept of extraterrestrial contact that are based in physics and our extreme lack of concrete knowledge about the nature of life, the nature of the universe and the nature of intelligence. There's a lot of room for theories and day dreams in there, but not the certainty you will see many people expressing. That's a matter of faith. I'm not a creature of faith. I have no problem with whatever others have faith in, as long as they refrain from telling me it’s a proven certainty. In terms of lost_shaman's much more moderate view that UFO sightings have occurred throughout history and have tuned up in works of art, as I've said I have no problem with the notion on a general level, I just have yet to see it demonstrated in any of the artworks or legends I have researched for this thread thus far. There are many still on my "to do" list so we'll see what comes up. I'm not as closed as some of you are making me out to be.

Originally posted by torbjon
Sure, I use clichés, and metaphors, and similes, and a whole slough of other wonderfully weird wiggly wordy widgets that give me a yummy in my tummy, ‘cause that’s the kind of artist that I am… (a really obnoxious one, but at least they pay me *laughs*)

Do visual artists not use the same things?

Is a shield just a shield and nothing more?

You can use any forms of language you like. I wouldn't put the cliché quite on the level of the metaphor, but of course art utilizes such things. I was just trying to be playful but apparently when I do that it usually turns out I'm just being a jerk.

I never said a shield is just a shield and nothing more. I said the shield was a sovereignty symbol for a territory with compelling parallels to the Palladium from the legend of Troy. If you see more or something different please share it. I've tried to present material that backs what I say so that I'm not just telling people my unspecified opinion. That's all I ask of others who want to present a counter viewpoint. Any material that suggests the shield is really a UFO has not yet been produced. If you have another interpretation, go for it, please. If you just think it's whatever a viewer thinks it is I'm afraid you're wrong. When the jeton was designed and minted it was intended to represent something. As I suggested earlier, we can't apply more modern conceptions of interpretation to works from specific historical eras because that is not likely to be how the artist conceived of the work. We'll always be limited in determining the full extent of any given artist's intentions for any piece, but we can try, and we can get damn close. We can also examine these works and be wrong, It's okay. In fact when new material or information surfaces that can change your conception of a work you already thought you were familiar with, it's a rush, an elation, for me at times a feeling that is transcendental. But until someone unearths a secret diary of Uccello that says "I saw a strange orange saucer-shaped object in the sky last night. I'm going to hide it in my latest painting disguised as St. Jerome's hat.", then we can feel pretty safe in believing that the object is a hat and its purpose is to help identify St. Jerome.

Originally posted by torbjon
The artwork on your site is a great example, there’s much more going on there than just simple collages… more than just the sum of the parts. There’s humor, and angst, and rage and fear, and more going on there than I will EVER have words for.

If you can sum up a work of your art and tell me that that is All that it means then you’ve failed in communicating because I feel more from it.

Well I am a sucker for compliments so you're already winning me over. It isn't my web site. I'm just an EC newbie, but thank you for following the link and looking at my work. If you're a visual artist then I highly recommend the game of Exquisite Corpse. You may note that a person willing to play a collaborative art game based on blind synchronicities is not likely to hold the reductionary viewpoint on art that you think that I do. The corpse I have direct linked in my signature now (I only have two up so far), mine is the third panel with men in masks, is a work I really like and am proud of on its own but when added to the panels of the other players it's part of something much more then the sum of its parts. It's amazing to me and I feel it speaks greatly about the subjective nature of art. I'm a surrealist by nature and philosophy, but a big part of that is being a realist.

Originally posted by torbjon
My snide remarks were actually an attempt to offer an insight.

Doesn’t mean it was a Good one, or that you should look at it or ponder it or anything *shrugs* just an offer.

And trust me comrade, if I Really wanted ta frost ya, you’d be glazed *smirks* yer buttons are easy ta push.

rock on
twj

I guess the flattery portion is over... . Snide was probably the wrong word to use, but I'm not looking to be psychoanalyzed, thanks. You act like I'm in some sort of fringe because I have an interest in art analysis and because I want to clarify works that people are misconstruing, like that's some form of abnormal behavior or something. You have very little information to be making judgment value statements about me but whatever. I can tell you're real deep and you put a lot of stock in your own insights, as proudly uninformed as they may be. I suppose my buttons are rather easy to push. I'm not dispassionate about most of the things I do or say. Is that what you're here on the ATS boards to do, mon ami, push people's buttons? I think they call that trolling. As for you "glazing" me, it's possible but I kind of doubt it. You only think you have a handle on me.


[edit on 11-1-2006 by Cicada]

originally posted by lost_shaman
People make lists. Sue them.

That is a very good idea. I'm taking Cicada v. the Reptilian Agenda all the way to the Supreme Court. There's no way those robed reptiles are going to rule against me. I wonder how I'll prove damages though...

originally posted by lost_shaman
You keep saying I can't prove this or that . I never made an argument that I could. I didn't say I could prove anything on this thread.

Well I'm just misreading you then. You use the terms self-evident, and logical to think, and present examples, and I tend to associate those statements with proof. Certainly there are many who do present the material in debate as proof of UFOs in history and as proof of much more, of ancient alien kingdoms and wandering planets, genetic tinkering, etc., etc. When I respond to examples provided by you, you have to realize that I'm still making my presentation to a larger audience whose concepts on this matter may not be as highly refined as yours are (that's a complement). You know at some point in ATS future someone is going to post something on one of the artworks or legends discussed in this post as evidence that squid men created us as a slave race (I am not saying that you believe in squid men). When it happens, and it will happen, they can be directed to the material investigation on this thread and at least maybe realize that it isn't so cut and dried. That's the intention at least, I'm likely failing.

originally posted by lost_shaman
Now that you have shown examples of art from Josephus' account it seems you've proven what I said.

See, you said proven. Oh wait, you said I've proven... okay I'm getting confused. But seriously, it only shows that people illustrate based on descriptions in the text, something we all knew already.




[edit on 11-1-2006 by Cicada]

Very interesting read. I also agree that UFOs have been depicted in artwork for thousands of years.

originally posted by lost_shaman
1235:
General Yoritsume was at military camp with his unit on September 24, 1235, when a most extraordinary phenomenon was sighted. Through the night and into the early morning lights in the sky were seen swinging, circling, and looping. General Yoritsume had some astronomers working for him investigate this phenomenon. They came up with perhaps the first explanation offered for UFOs, 'The whole thing is completely natural, General, it is only the wind making the stars sway'.

This is an intriguing account that I immediately suspected was going to be difficult to trace to an original source. I was right about that. Perhaps if I lived in Japan, spoke or read Japanese, or if the internet was able to more easily access and translate non-Western websites, then I wouldn't have the difficulty with it I am experiencing. If anyone else wants to take a crack at it and gets farther then I have please post your findings on this thread. Already the lack of verifiability seems to weigh against this account, but in fairness I will say that until further information can be found that suggests otherwise, this could be a legitimate example of a historic UFO sighting. The first thing I wondered when I read it was "Who is General Yoritsume?". I have an answer to that question, I think.

But first I want to deal with the closest individual I can find as a source for this story. It is an individual in the modern era and as we shall see, someone whose credibility is seriously in question. As described in earlier posts, search engine results for these supposed UFO accounts tend to bring up multiple sites, in multiple languages, presenting the same information word for word, over and over. It is not completely valueless to investigate these sites, however, as some are cited better than others. Thus far the only traceable source of this account comes from one Yusuke J. Matsumura.

Yusuke J. Matsumura is an obscure figure in the Western world but not completely unknown. I wish I were able to find and present a fuller picture of him rather than scattered and incomplete anecdotes. Here is what I have found:

Yusuke J. Matsumura is described as "the father figure of Japanese saucerdom". He is the founder of the redundantly named Cosmic Brotherhood Association (CBA) and their sub sect the Sky Scouts (apparently an offshoot for children). The CBA was founded in 1957, and is described as being influenced by the now largely discredited work of George Adamski. The CBA is also described as a borderline cult and as the inspiration for several Japanese UFO Cults. Over the years the CBA has released numerous publications on UFOs and Mr. Matsumura has authored many articles on the topic that have been presented in American and European magazines and journals on the subject. In 1957, very likely prior to the founding of the CBA, Mr. Matsumura took photos of alleged UFOs outside his home in Yokohama. In 1961 the CBA published a report on a Mr. Matsumura (perhaps a different individual) who witnessed two cloud cigars seen outside a DC-4 near Aso-san, Japan. One emitted a ball of light.
'61 Encounter Aso-san, Japan

I'm not sure if this is the same incident or an additional sighting in 1961 by Mr. Matsumura:

This broad luminous disc was seen above the town of Kyushis, in Japan, December first 1961 worms midnight. L`objet passed successively from the red to l`orange, of the yellow to the white. The photo one was taken by Yusuke J Matsumura with an apparatus Minolta SR-1 munt d`un teleobjective.

translated from French using Alta Vista Babel Fish Translation

Apparently in 1962 Mr. Matsumura was on a flight to Tokyo and sighted this:

The 13. july 1962 flew Yusuke J. Matsumura by passages, Avenue Nippon Airways, from Sapporo to Tokyo, when a walloping diskosformet object come to seem to the right of the plane and pass through amid the plane blade and round at the back the plane. Matsumura had his camera at themselves and took two good portraits the object.

translated from Danish using Langenberg Language Translation


An item of information offered at times as proof of UFOs is a letter to Mr. Matsumura dated May 5th, 1967 from Air Marshall Roesmin Nurjadin, Commander in Chief of the Indonesian Air Force which discusses Indonesian pilots sightings of UFOs including an incident when the Indonesian Air Force opened fire on UFOs.
UFO Comments by World's Top Military Leaders

Also in 1967 there was an article that mentioned a dispute between the CBA junior sub sect the Sky Scouts and their affiliate the International Sky Scouts Association operating out of England and chaired by Joham Quanjer. The Sky Scouts disavowed ties to the ISSA due to the latter group's decision to use "the ancient, winged sun-disc emblem" as a logo. The CBA stated the symbol was used by the ancients of "Chine-Mu-Lemuria-Atlantis-Egypt" and that it was stained by sacrificial blood. They also felt it was a bad omen as all the cultures who utilized it perished. They further contended that it was wrong to submit children to pagan worship. In a separate incident, the ISSA changed the name of their organization to CONTACT at the request of the Boy Scouts Association.

The Sky Scouts Muddle

In 1973 Mr. Matsumura was a passenger on a flight out of Hamburg, Germany. In some accounts of this event he is described as being a Japanese businessman. En route to Frankfurt to catch a flight to Tokyo, he witnessed a small, dark saucer-shape outside the plane, high above the cloud line:

The 4. january 1973 flew Mr. Yusuke J. Matsumura, a japanese wheeler-dealer, by indenrigsfly from Hamborg to Frankfurt at noon. When the plane were come at blade from Hamborg, so he a little dark lineformet object some kilometre gone and overhead the clouds. He took his camera and took two portraits from the object.

translated from Danish using Langenberg Language Translation

Also:
[url=http://members.tripod.com/ancientknightsc/id166.htm]'73 Encounter Hamburg, Germany

That same year he authored an article through the CBA, reprinted in "UFONews Special Issue" vol.5, No.1 entitled "Golden Flying Saucer Unveiled on Cathedral Dome's Mural Paintings".


From Daniel Fry.com

"Golden Flying Saucer"
Both hands raised in blessing, "Almighty God" is depicted in a mural painted around the turn of the century by Russian artist P. E. Myassoyedov. This impressive mural dominates the dome of the famous Alexander Nevsky Memorial Cathedral in Sofia, Bulgaria. It includes above the left hand of "Almighty God" an unmistakable golden space ship.

Why should a U.F.O. be painted on the dome of the Cathedral? Yusuka J. Matsumura, Editor of UFO. News-CBA International took photographs of religious murals on three recent European trips. They are reproduced in UFO. News Vol. 5, No. 1, Winter, 1973, Special Issue. This publication is 21-3/8" x 15-1/4" and contains 6 profusely illustrated pages. Unfortunately, we could find no price for the publication. However, if you wish to order this issue, please address your request to U.F.O. Vews, Naka P.O. Box 12, Yokohama 232, Japan. "The cathedral which now attracts world's attention," says the U.F.O. News, "was built in memory of their gratitude and respect for those twenty thousand people of the country and friendly nation Russia who died in the liberation war in 1878 in order to set Bulgaria free from domination of the Empire of Osman Turkey for five hundred years. The name of the cathedral was dedicated to great Russian general Alexander Nevsky, a national hero of Russia, who protected Orthodox Church from its enemy."

Two bright clouds (spaceships?) appearing above Christ on the cross are painted on the Decani Monastery wall in Yugoslavia. Two angels with eyes and ears covered are drawn between the two spaceships.

There is a 300-year-old mural painting of an ancient artificial sputnik-shaped object at the San Pietro Church at Montalcino, Provence of Toscana, in the center of Italy.

And a rocket-shaped flying object is found painted in the Bulgarian Cathedral Varna, at Varna on the Black Sea.

A flying saucer appears in a wall-painting of the Princely Church at Tirgoviste, Romania.

One page of the U.F.O. News, entitled "Christ Spaceship vs. Apollo Spaceship" shows pictures from icons and murals throughout Europe matched with pictures of an Apollo space rocket-a most interesting conception. Another lengthy article was titled: "New light on Christ Spaceship! Divine Vehicles in Transfiguration and above the Cross." This issue of UFO. News is published in Japanese, but includes an English supplement. It contains almost 40 pictures.Daniel Fry.com

I can find pictures of the cathedral but as of yet none of the Myassoyedov mural, although I would dearly love to see it.

In 1974 the CBA published previously unavailable photos from the Apollo-11 lunar mission that they asserted were absolute evidence of alien spacecraft. These photos are proven forgeries. Actual film footage of the mission containing bright reflections and glares off a window had the contrast enhanced and extraneous reflections cropped and airbrushed out in order to isolate globes of light.

This is detailed in this long but interesting article on the various Apollo-11/UFO claims:
The Apollo-11 Incidents by James Oberg

I believe this is one of the "snowman" photos in question:

More can be found at UFO Sightings by Astronauts.

Here's a CBA article on a 1978 sighting by Japanese pilots:
'78 Encounter of Boeing 727

In this article Mr. Matsumura is described as being under "virtual house arrest" over the dogu figure issue:

The Dogu Enigma: Primitive Artifact or Six-Thousand-Year-Old Space Suit

More on the Dogu.

As disparate as these various accounts may be, we can derive some information about Mr. Matsumura, the as of yet only traceable source of the General Yoritsume sighting. There are the probability defying multiple UFO sightings, the proven doctoring of Apollo-11 film footage, articles presenting works of Christian iconography as evidence of historical sightings, an organization described as a cult with a subprogram geared toward children, and a belief in ancient astronaut theories.

But let's assume despite the apparently disreputable nature of Mr. Matsumura that the story of General Yoritsume is not completely manufactured. I'm willing to believe this to be the case. This returns me to my initial question. Who was General Yoritsume? I'll present information on this in my next post.

mod edit to use "ex" instead of "quote"
Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**


[edit on 12-1-2006 by sanctum]

Originally posted by Cicada

But let's assume despite the apparently disreputable nature of Mr. Matsumura that the story of General Yoritsume is not completely manufactured. I'm willing to believe this to be the case. This returns me to my initial question. Who was General Yoritsume? I'll present information on this in my next post.

I agree I have had poor luck as of yet , can't wait to see what you come up with.

For one thing some people say or spell the name Yoritsume and often it is spelled Yoritsune .

Also alternate dates are sometimes refered to 1235 , and 1412.

There is a Titular Shogun (4th) named Kojo Yoritsune of the Fujiwara clan who held his position 1226 - 1244. I seriously doubt this is the General Yoritsume ( or Yoritsune ) that we are looking for.

The reference is also attributed to Jacques Vallee's, "Passport to Magonia", I believe pg. 9 . I don't have the book.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

originally posted by lost_shaman
The reference is also attributed to Jacques Vallee's, "Passport to Magonia", I believe pg. 9 . I don't have the book.

I did have Jacques Vallee in my notes on this but his source of the story is Mr. Matsumura. There is a sample of "Passport to Magonia" on Amazon.com and luckily the passage in question is available to read. Here are three paragraphs from Mr. Vallee's book:

"The Japanese must also receive credit for having organized the first official investigation, and the story is so amusing, and parallels so well recent activities of the U.S. Air Force that I cannot resist reproducing it here.

The date was September 24, 1235, seven centuries before our time, and General Yoritsume was camping with his army. Suddenly, a curious phenomenon was observed: mysterious sources of light were seen to swing and circle in the southwest, moving in loops until the early morning. General Yoritsume ordered what we would now term a "full-scale scientific investigation," and his consultants set to work. Fairly soon they made their report. "The whole thing is completely natural, General," they said in substance. "It is only the wind making the stars sway." My source of information for this report, Yusuke J. Matsumura, of Yokohama, adds sadly: "Scholars on government pay have always made ambiguous statements like this!"

Celestial phenomena seem to have been so commonplace in the Japanese skies during the Middle Ages that they influenced human events in a direct way. Panics, riots, and disruptive social movements were often linked to celestial apparitions. The Japanese peasants had the disagreeable tendency to interpret the "signs from heaven" as strong indications that their revolts and demands against the feudal system or against foreign invaders were just, and as assurance that their rebellions would be crowned with success. Numerous examples of such can be quoted. For instance, on September 12, 1271, the famous priest Nichiren was about to be beheaded at Tatsunookuchi, Kamakura, when there appeared in the sky an object like a full moon, shiny and bright. Needless to say, the officials panicked and the execution was not carried out."

From "Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore, and Parallel Worlds" by Jacques Vallee
McGraw-Hill/Contemporary; Reprint edition (April 1, 1993)
Originally published by the Henry Regnery Co., 1969.

From what I can tell from looking at the book's index, this is the only reference to the 1235 incident in Mr. Vallee's text. I have a hunch that Mr. Vallee is the source of the information as it is presented in the standard UFO timeline, just from the way it is worded.

originally posted by lost_shaman
For one thing some people say or spell the name Yoritsume and often it is spelled Yoritsune .

Also alternate dates are sometimes referred to 1235 , and 1412.

There is a Titular Shogun (4th) named Kojo Yoritsune of the Fujiwara clan who held his position 1226 - 1244. I seriously doubt this is the General Yoritsume ( or Yoritsune ) that we are looking for.

Actually I'm almost positive that General Yoritsume is the Shogun Kujo Yoritsune. Apparently Yoritsume is one of many common misspellings of Yoritsune in English translations of his name:

Fact Spider - Kujo Yoritsune

Also, a direct translation of Shogun would be General:

Wikipedia - Shogun

I could be wrong, but it seems to me pretty unlikely that a reference to a General Yoritsume from 1235, during the reign of Kujo Yoritsune, would be another individual.

A search on Google using the terms Shogun Yoritsune and UFOs brings up a couple of websites that do attribute this story to Kujo Yoritsune.

"In Japan, during the War of the Shoguns, in the year of 1235, the room Kamakura Shogun, Fujiwara Yoritsune, and its troop was camped when mysterious lights had appeared in the sky. The objects had been seen by hours making circles and loopings that they impressed the military. Shogun [ Heading of Sir of a clan in medieval Japan ] asked for to an inquiry the deep one on the event, whose resulted they are not known. Perhaps this has been the first official inquiry on the UFOs of that if it has notice. In fact, it was relatively common that the involved governing in conflicts where identified objects were not seen, asked for its commanders who inquired its nature."

From the Brazilian site:
Alienigenas.dk3.com Translated from Portuguese by Google.

It seems possible that the Brazilian researchers have more successfully translated the information from Japanese. This version also doesn't include the passage referring to the wind moving the stars, which suggests their version may have come from a source other than Mr. Matsumura.

I'm not certain if in the feudal era of Japanese history there were any other military ranks besides Shogun that might translate into general in English.

I must admit that I knew very little about the details and complexities of the Japanese Feudal Era before I began researching this account. 1235 CE is very early in the initial phase of the feudal era, the Kamakura Period.

I've found differing accounts on when the reign of Kujo Yoritsune began, either in 1219 when he was one year old or in 1226 when he was seven. In 1235 when the supposed phenomenon occurred he was only eighteen years old. The most significant activity that he enacted in 1235 was the construction of the Myo-o-in Temple.

Connected as this Temple and the Shogun Kujo Yoritsune were to Esoteric Buddhism, I can not wonder if perhaps the legend of the moving lights are related in some way to an experience during a transcendental state of consciousness. That this was a key component of Yortsune's nature is evident through the fact that after the title of Shogun was handed over to Yoritsune's son in 1244, Yoritsune spent the remaining twelve years of his life as a Buddhist priest. Note that this is purely speculation on my part.

Recognizing my limitations in investigating this matter I consulted a friend of mine well versed in Japanese history and better equipped for handling matters of Japanese language and literature. He is going to conduct some research and if he produces anything of note I will feature it in a future post. His immediate opinion was similar to my own. This is just an opinion, but the account sounds like folklore. Any cosmology of the Kamakura era would be based on ancient Chinese Astrology/Astronomy via deeply Buddhist conceptions. As Mr. Vallee demonstrates in his material quoted above, Japanese (and also Chinese) historians routinely made records of astronomical phenomenon. It could be that such an event occurred on the date mentioned and that Mr. Matsumura or another individual misconstrued, enhanced or fabricated the scholars' report.

Another aspect of Kujo Yoritsune that could potentially be involved in origins of this account was his participation and proficiency with the Tanka form of Waka Poetry. Similar but longer then Haiku, and often an interactive process between two individuals through correspondences. It wouldn't be the only time, by any means, that poetic language was misconstrued as describing a literal event. This of course is speculation on my part. When (if) additional information comes up I will share it on this thread.

Cicade:

*laughs*

hey, you were tearing me apart last night at the same time that I was editing my post!… wish I’d known that then, maybe we could’ve chatted a bit *sighs* so it goes. I did indeed type alla that crap and whereas I immediately chose to edit it, well, too little too late *shrugs* I’ll take my licks and everything you had to say is right on and fine by me.

Look, yer not a jerk, yer most definitely NOT an idiot, and you are no more on the fringe than anybody else is (everybody is on somebodies fringe, right?) I wouldn’t take the time to look at your artwork, poke through over 200 posts of yours, nor would I be chatting with you now if I didn’t think you were on the ball.

I agree wholeheartedly that some ufo nuts will take a piece of ancient artwork and twist it to fit their belief system, and that that is a bad thing.

But look, comrade, by your own admission you don’t believe in ufos visiting this planet (and that’s Great! That’s Fine, that is Totally Cool) but because ufos are not part of your belief system, you don’t see them in ancient art. You see something else that Does fit into your belief system. You see another explanation for what that image could be… and very probably a correct explanation, but that’s not the point.

The point is, it wouldn’t matter What image anybody offered you to analyze, you Will find a logical explanation for what that image symbolizes, an explanation that jives with your beliefs, and, your beliefs do not include ufos.

You could actually be looking at an ancient rendition of a flying saucer and not know it, in the exact same way that some ufo nut could be looking at an ancient rendition of clouds and think it Was a flying saucer.

Here’s a piece of very recognizable modern art:

images.ksc.nasa.gov...

We all know what that image stands for, there should be no doubt in anybodies mind.

And yet, it could just as easily be a 5000 year old symbol. No one would bat an eye if this motif turned up in an old Egyptian tomb or on an ancient Babylonian cylinder seal…. We’ve seen this symbol so many times throughout our history that we don’t really pay attention to it anymore, it’s That old.

Who is to say that it could not have meant then what it means now?

rock on
twj

Cicada you may be right that it is indeed Kojo Yoritsune. I originally thought this also , until I came across mention of Generals in the Bakufu Army.

www.docoja.com...

Initially the term of Bakufu appeared in China to designate the headquarters of a general in expedition and means "office under tent".

Also the name Yoritsune seems fairly common.

I note that from Larry Hatch's *U* Database the credibility factor is given as an 8 from 1- 10.

www.virtuallystrange.net...
YEAR ...... Month..... Contint.... Country... Provinc.... Strange... Credibl
1235....... 9............. ASP......... JPN......... HNS........ 5............. 8

However , that seems meaningless to me without seeing the Historical information firsthand.


Edit: On a side note , I could swear that the " Snowman" Photo's Hoax is mentioned in Arthur C. Clark's 2010: Odyssey Two. I'll try and see if I can find that.

Edit: Oh well I can't find it without re-reading the book , maybe it was just something I read Arthor C. Clark talk about on-line somewhere.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

originally posted by torbjon
hey, you were tearing me apart last night at the same time that I was editing my post!… wish I’d known that then, maybe we could’ve chatted a bit *sighs* so it goes. I did indeed type alla that crap and whereas I immediately chose to edit it, well, too little too late *shrugs* I’ll take my licks and everything you had to say is right on and fine by me.

Hmm. I actually kind of liked your post pre-edit. I wouldn't diverge from my task at hand if I didn't think what you are saying is worth talking about. I appreciate someone bringing the philosophical aspect of this subject into question. You're right that it is kind of marshmallowy territory, but conversation and challenges will only refine thought.

originally posted by torbjon
But look, comrade, by your own admission you don’t believe in ufos visiting this planet (and that’s Great! That’s Fine, that is Totally Cool) but because ufos are not part of your belief system, you don’t see them in ancient art. You see something else that Does fit into your belief system. You see another explanation for what that image could be… and very probably a correct explanation, but that’s not the point.

The point is, it wouldn’t matter What image anybody offered you to analyze, you Will find a logical explanation for what that image symbolizes, an explanation that jives with your beliefs, and, your beliefs do not include ufos.

You could actually be looking at an ancient rendition of a flying saucer and not know it, in the exact same way that some ufo nut could be looking at an ancient rendition of clouds and think it Was a flying saucer.

Man, I must have said something in one of those 200 posts that betrayed my socialist leanings. I get your point and it is a fair one, but just to clarify I do believe in UFOs and have said as much multiple times, just not the extraterrestrial hypothesis. Maybe I am biased in my analysis, in fact I'm sure I'm biased about a lot of things on levels I can't even perceive.

Believe it or not I am honest and sincere when I state that I will let you know what I find to the best of my ability, I will not ignore or distort information that doesn't jibe with my view and I will state when I am uncertain, when possibilities exist, etc., as I think I have been doing. And other opinions are welcome, challenges are welcome and I will likely challenge other opinions presented unless I get really dazzled. You may note that I probably wouldn't have provided the UFO/ET proponents all of that material related to Yusuke J. Matsumura if I was interested in controlling people's conceptions or force-feeding them my worldview. Someone could really have a field day with that stuff.

So far I don't find any of the artworks (and jeton) are depicting UFOs or otherwise. These legends are more difficult to account for. As we move on we will see other areas where the explanations presented by UFOlogists may seem more tenable. I'm not sure, I'm researching as I go along. This is why I keep emphasizing the vast difference between the general argument and specific analysis. My conceptions are not actually frozen. They evolve as I learn and discover things. Despite all else this thread has been a tremendous educational experience for me on a number of diverse topics, and I hope that others are getting that from it as well despite what may be our differences of opinion. I actually enjoy a good presentation no matter what the topic as long as it isn't completely warped from true or morally reprehensible (which I know is a subjective quality).

Most people don't know and don't care at all about Uccello, but I do even if I know just a little bit about him. I know that I am indebted to him for the advancements he made in visual communication, artistic expression and realization of nature. I feel I owe it to him, and every other artist discussed, to at the least put their name on their work, look at a clean and clear image at a reasonable scale (it's so much better), and try to understand the world they lived in that shaped their expression. I do think that art is larger than the artist. I've said as much multiple times in other posts. Knowing what can be known only enhances your experience of the ephemerals. Plus art history makes you a better artist. It's better and more immediate than studio classes.

originally posted by torbjon
And yet, it could just as easily be a 5000 year old symbol. No one would bat an eye if this motif turned up in an old Egyptian tomb or on an ancient Babylonian cylinder seal…. We’ve seen this symbol so many times throughout our history that we don’t really pay attention to it anymore, it’s That old.

Who is to say that it could not have meant then what it means now?

Or mean now what it meant then, or both. I'm with you. I actually don't take modern symbols and logos at all lightly. Just off the top of my head esoteric connotations of the eagle would include alchemical (substances, principles, properties, and more) connotations, the constellation Scorpio (all that it entails or as a sub section), definite solar connotations, Ra, Zeus/Jupiter, wisdom, secret languages (all birds can symbolize this), vision, flight of course, kingship, domination, etc. I won't even go into the moon.


[edit on 12-1-2006 by Cicada]

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Cicada you may be right that it is indeed Kojo Yoritsune. I originally thought this also , until I came across mention of Generals in the Bakufu Army.

Umm...Maybe I'm misreading you or missing it, but I think the site is saying that Bakufu is an alternate term for Shogun derived from the term for the Shogun's administration, the shogunate (in English). Bakufu refers to a tent government, which I assume means the mobile office of a chief warlord as compared to the Imperial palace in Kyoto.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
I note that from Larry Hatch's *U* Database the credibility factor is given as an 8 from 1- 10.

Larry Hatch's *U* UFO Database seems fascinating but I must admit I’m a bit perplexed at how to access it. I think I need to download something that only runs on Windows so I guess I'm ruled out on that here on my Mac. Can you explain how this works? How is the credibility score determined? If there's any validity to this it could be a powerful tool. The maps are pretty neat.

Originally posted by lost_shaman
Edit: On a side note , I could swear that the " Snowman" Photo's Hoax is mentioned in Arthur C. Clark's 2010: Odyssey Two. I'll try and see if I can find that.

I haven't read it in over a decade but I'd be interested to see what he said about it. You mentioned astronomical phenomena at one point and this last post reminded me of a detail in "2001: A Space Odyssey". Every time the monolith makes an appearance there's a major cosmological alignment taking place. It's subtle but look for it the next time you see the movie. Shadows fall over planets and moons like eclipses, sun, earth and moon will be shown in line or as a column. Before Bowman enters the monolith near the end the alignments are happening with the moons of Jupiter, kind of a heady concept. I wonder if in some way this was a comment by Kubrick/Clarke on the true basis of ancient astronaut concepts. Of course this is just speculation. My source on this insight was the author Jay Weidner and a direct link to his article on the alchemical aspects of "2001" can be found through my ATS thread Alchemical Kubrick.


[edit on 12-1-2006 by Cicada]

Originally posted by Cicada

Umm...Maybe I'm misreading you or missing it, but I think the site is saying that Bakufu is an alternate term for Shogun derived from the term for the Shogun's administration, the shogunate (in English). Bakufu refers to a tent government, which I assume means the mobile office of a chief warlord as compared to the Imperial palace in Kyoto.

Let me try and clarify. While reading about the early Kamakura Period , there is mention of Bakufu Armies in the East concentrated around Kyoto. While Yuritsune was the "Shogun" by Title, there are many bands of Samurai with allegiance to Diamyo's in the " Bukufu Army" some of which could have been considered Generals.

My understanding is that Yuritsune is a puppet of the Hojo Clan and holds no real authority.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

Originally posted by lost_shaman
My understanding is that Yuritsune is a puppet of the Hojo Clan and holds no real authority.

Well yeah, it's hard for seven year olds to be effective nation leaders. That is why the Hojo clan allowed for a noble from the Fujiwara clan to fill the position and also why he was replaced by his son before he was thirty years old. Of course there's a big difference between real authority and authority over commoners and underlings like soldiers (even the Samurai many of whom were commoners) and scholars.

Yeah, but I'm just saying there are actually Samurai in Tents (1)all over and especially near Kyoto. And judging by the way the account reads I am leaning more towards an actual Leader of Warriors in their tent city being responsible for the account instead of 17- 18 yr old Yoritsune sitting around in his Palace in Kamakura.

1. The Bakufu , I learned , is translated "Tent government " because Warriors lived in Tents.

www.wsu.edu:8080...


Also note that the end of the Kamakura period is brought about after the Kamakura Bakufu sends Ashikaga Takauji in 1331( Ashikaga Bakufu Period ) to put down the Emperor because he is considered a " Brilliant General " of the Kamakura Bakufu. He switches sides and the Hojo end up losing power.

www.wsu.edu:8080...

[edit on 13-1-2006 by lost_shaman]

lost_shaman,

I was watching a History channel show on Samurai and they were making references to non-Shogun military commanders as generals. They were talking about the 16th century, but this coupled with your example from the 14th century is enough to convince me that general does not have to mean Shogun.

But check this out. There is the Brazilian website I linked and quoted above as an external source that does relate the account to the 4th Shogun Kujo Yoritsune. That is the version that doesn't feature the explanation of the wind moving the stars and I really think at this time the only rendition that suggests the story exists outside Yusuke J. Matsumura. I'll try to further translate and investigate that site.

Ultimately this is just a matter of details. If we can identify the figure as Kujo Yoritsune that would allow us to examine the matter via specific, known information about him. If we can't make a determination on who the figure is all we're left with is an untraceable legend, even if it can be determined that Mr. Matsumura didn't fabricate the story.

I was searching around and noticed another "UFO" event involving Nichiren in 1270 or 1271.

So looking for Kojo Yoritsune references I found one in a link about the life of Nichiren so I checked into his account in 1270 and look ...

Link

On September 12, one day before the government issued an order to dispatch the government's army to Kyushu to defend Japan against the Mongols, War Minister Nagasaki Yoritsuna, representing the government, arrested Nichiren and sentenced him to exile to Sado Island. Nichirô and four others also were arrested and put into a dungeon in the compound of the residence of Yadoya Mitsunori. Nagasaki Yoritsuna intended to execute Nichiren that night in spite of the official sentence of exile.

Sept. 24, 1235 ........ or ,... Sept. 12 , 1270 ?

The 1270(1) account..

www.ufoevidence.org...

"...on September 12, 1271, the famous priest Nichiren was about to be beheaded at Tatsunokuchi, Kamakura, when there appeared in the sky an object like a full moon, shiny and bright. Needless to say, the officials panicked and the execution was not carried out.

It seems to me that these two "events" are actually one event. With Kojo Yoritsune getting the credit for Nagasaki Yoritsuna's "investigation ". (if this even happened?)

If anyone is a General it would be War Minister Nagasaki Yoritsuna, not Shogun Kojo Yoritsune.

And if indeed the acount is accourate (?) Nagasaki Yoritsuna would have had reason to investigate.

la.nichirenshu.org...

On September 12, one day before the government issued an order to dispatch the government's army to Kyushu to defend Japan against the Mongols, War Minister Nagasaki Yoritsuna, representing the government, arrested Nichiren and sentenced him to exile to Sado Island. Nichirô and four others also were arrested and put into a dungeon in the compound of the residence of Yadoya Mitsunori. Nagasaki Yoritsuna intended to execute Nichiren that night in spite of the official sentence of exile. Nichiren was taken to the Execution Ground at Tatsunokuchi, but the execution was suspended by a messenger from the Regent Hôjô Tokimune, who had sensed the illegal plot.

Hybrid Version?

Nichiren Shonin (1222-1282)
by Ryuei Michael McCormick

Part 4: The Four Major Persecutions (par. 5)


On September 12, 1271, Nichiren Shonin was arrested as part of the shogunate's effort to quell dissidents and present a united front against the Mongol threat. At midnight, War Minister Nagasaki Yoritsuna had Nichiren Shonin taken to the execution grounds on Tatsunokuchi beach. Nichiren Shonin was saved from death when the executioner and the other samurai were frightened by a mysterious ball of light which flew through the sky. A messenger from the regent arrived soon after with orders that Nichiren Shonin was not to be executed in any case but exiled to Sado Island. This fourth persecution is commemorated on September 12 as the Tatsunokuchi Persecution.

[edit on 13-1-2006 by lost_shaman]