Talk:Johannes of Jerusalem

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Untitled[edit]

I think the prophet Johannes of Jerusalem is not a candidate for speedy deletion. Look at the articles in the link. He made several very interesting prediction for the time around the year 2000 and it is estonishing, how much of them is correct! Please look at the articles in the links and translate them into English language. I think his prophecies are very remarkable!

It would be a good idea if someone can translate the text in the shqip version! [no user name]

The bottom line is this: 1.the text appeared in a French edition in 1994. It is not known earlier. 2. There is no Johannes/Jean/John of Jerusalem in the historical record at this time. 3. The discoverer of the text, Professor M.Galvieski, does not exist. I have discussed this prophecy here: http://historye.blogspot.com/2005/07/john-of-jerusalem.html In my view its modern. Still an impressive prophecy, but late 20th century. Sahajhist 03:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For a further view, see the comment here http://sahajayogaradio.org/blog/?p=14 Sahajhist 16:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SahajHist, please read WP:COI#How_to_avoid_COI_edits and WP:SPAM --Simon D M 18:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simon DM, please look up the definition of Spam. Sfacets 23:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a medievalist, I can assure you that this is a fake, and not even a very skillful one:

The author who published this discovery in 1994, "professor" M. Galvieski, has no record as an expert in medieval history or Romance philology, nor does he have a record of otherwise scholarly publications. Given that the same Prophéties de Jean de Jérusalem were later republished by a certain Jean de Mareuil [1], which is the pseudonym of an author who also published Les ultimes prophéties de Nostradamus [2], "M. Galvieski" too is likely to be just the pseudonym of somebody who is earning his life with confecting this kind of litter(ature)
The story of the tradition and discovery of the only "manuscript" is exactly the sort of Indiana Jones and Dan Brown tale likely to be invented by someone with no familarity whatsoever with medieval textual transmission.
The French text of these "prophecies" as published on the web [3], allegedly a translation of the medieval Latin or Old French original, betrays a striking ignorance of the style of medieval texts and prophecies, and, at the same time, a striking familiarity with post-medieval prophecies of the modernized Nostradamus aka Jean de Mareuil sort.
Prophecies are of course anachronistic by defintion, as they must refer to future events, yet the Livre des prophéties de Jean de Jérusalem includes an explicit reference to an ancient Roman text and author very unlikely to be quoted by someone who is said to have received his education at Vezelay in the second half of the 11th century: "Des continents qu'Hérodote ne nommait que dans ses rêves se seront ajoutés au-delà des grandes forêts dont parle Tacite, et loin au bout de mers illimitées qui commencent après les Colonnes d'Hercule." ("Continents which even Herodot dit not mention in his dreamings will have added themselves beyond the great forests mentioned by Tacitus"). Herodot is not an author one would expect to be quoted in such a context, yet there was at least a certain medieval Latin tradition spreading his name and bits of knowledge of his Histories. The same however is not true for Tacitus. His fame had eclipsed already in ancient times, one of the last ancient Christian authors to quote him by name was Orosius, see Tacitean studies. The last medieval author who mentioned his name and was able, at the same time, to copy passages from his Germania -- which is obviously the work referred to by the "grandes forêts dont parle Tacite" -- was Rudolf of Fulda in the 9th century. A monk educated in Vezelay and participating in the first Crusade by the end of the 11th century is extremely unlikely to have had the necessary knowlegde and the audience for alluding to the Germania of Tacitus, given that he would have been writing more than three centuries before the time when the unique manuscript of this work was brought from Germany to Italy and was rediscovered and popularized by Italian humanists.

--Otfried Lieberknecht (talk) 01:08, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]