Your oppinion on odd skeleton position found in Roman tomb

Yôḥānān

Ad Honorem
Feb 2012
3,913
Portugal
Not if they were typically buried on their side, which would make the skeleton's look more normal.
That's how, according to the article posted by Tulius and the picures there show, they were buried in the Muslim necropolis which is located in the same place.

If he was a 3rd century Kwai Chang Caine running away from India, and practicing meditation people, maybe some students, might have wanted to bury him that way.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2018
638
Southern Indiana
That's how, according to the article posted by Tulius and the picures there show, they were buried in the Muslim necropolis which is located in the same place.

If he was a 3rd century Kwai Chang Caine running away from India, and practicing meditation people, maybe some students, might have wanted to bury him that way.
but his arms don't seem to be positioned in any meaningful way..
 
Mar 2018
984
UK
That's how, according to the article posted by Tulius and the picures there show, they were buried in the Muslim necropolis which is located in the same place.

If he was a 3rd century Kwai Chang Caine running away from India, and practicing meditation people, maybe some students, might have wanted to bury him that way.
To be honest as far fetched as the yogi theory may seem the alternatives being presented also cast doubts and would require corroboration based on info that is not available so far.
For instance would anyone allow a realtive to be buried in an awkward position just because the people digging were too lazy, assuming of course a position like that would not require more digging to the sides? Or in the diseased theory would it not be easier to make the limbs fit the grave rather than the opposite? And in the earthquake case shouldn't all the bones have been moved in disarrange and not only one part of the body? Of course there may be ways to justify those opinions but some info would be required to fill the gaps.
Nobody is saying it's *impossible* that he was a yoga master and buried in something vaguely resembling the lotus position.
Just like it isn't impossible that he was buried that way as a joke (or exhumed, replaced, and reburied as a joke).
Or maybe he was an inventor of a new type of interpretative dance and that was his main move.
Or maybe there was a local cult at the time that thought this position would guarantee his access to heaven.

But we don't discuss any of these because we know, intuitively, that these are all crazily unlikely. Every argument put forward in favour of the yogi theory essentially works just as well for any of those other ideas. If you want us to believe what is an apriori very unlikely preposition, you have to put evidence in favour of that preposition rather than asking us to disprove the existence of teapots around Jupiter.

So far, your theory is:
1) An indian man travelled to the Roman world
2) He was a yogi master
3) When he died, people decided to bury him in a position that *isn't* the lotus position, but something that only looks vaguely like it. This is despite such a burial position not being associated with any other yogi.
4) Having gone to so much peculiar effort, they did not include any artefact representing his cultural or religious beliefs with him.

Why is this theory even worth contemplating? Frankly, I'm annoyed with myself at having wasted time reading this thread and writing this post.
 
Aug 2018
638
Southern Indiana
4) Having gone to so much peculiar effort, they did not include any artefact representing his cultural or religious beliefs with him.
If he was a yogi or monk, he may have renounced worldly possessions, so the absence of artifacts might actually fit with that theory (not that I believe it).
 

Yôḥānān

Ad Honorem
Feb 2012
3,913
Portugal
but his arms don't seem to be positioned in any meaningful way..
The elbows are positioned outwards which doesn't seem a natural position if he was just dumped there.

Nobody is saying it's *impossible* that he was a yoga master and buried in something vaguely resembling the lotus position.
Just like it isn't impossible that he was buried that way as a joke (or exhumed, replaced, and reburied as a joke).
Or maybe he was an inventor of a new type of interpretative dance and that was his main move.
Or maybe there was a local cult at the time that thought this position would guarantee his access to heaven.

But we don't discuss any of these because we know, intuitively, that these are all crazily unlikely. Every argument put forward in favour of the yogi theory essentially works just as well for any of those other ideas. If you want us to believe what is an apriori very unlikely preposition, you have to put evidence in favour of that preposition rather than asking us to disprove the existence of teapots around Jupiter.

So far, your theory is:
1) An indian man travelled to the Roman world
2) He was a yogi master
3) When he died, people decided to bury him in a position that *isn't* the lotus position, but something that only looks vaguely like it. This is despite such a burial position not being associated with any other yogi.
4) Having gone to so much peculiar effort, they did not include any artefact representing his cultural or religious beliefs with him.

Why is this theory even worth contemplating? Frankly, I'm annoyed with myself at having wasted time reading this thread and writing this post.
1)The theory was already there, the purpose of this thread was in part to either show it wrong or find some evidence of it.

If he was a yogi or monk, he may have renounced worldly possessions, so the absence of artifacts might actually fit with that theory (not that I believe it).
Agreed, I'm under the impression by the end of the third season Caine had already given away most of the content of his bag and all was left were some healing herbs.
 
Aug 2018
638
Southern Indiana
I have another idea. This was a person of no real consequence and his burial was more functional than ceremonial. Imagine if he were lowered into his grave vertically instead of horizontally. One person on each side of the grave each grab an arm and lower him in feet first. His legs bend as his body is lowered down and his arms are just let go and flop to the sides.
 
Mar 2018
984
UK
1)The theory was already there, the purpose of this thread was in part to either show it wrong or find some evidence of it.
You appear to have not read my post, or misunderstood it. Nobody can show the theory (whether it is yours or not is of no particular relevance) is wrong. It's pretty much impossible to prove a negative in this situation. But it's absurdly unlikely. Maybe I should start a thread asking for somehow to show that he wasn't an interpretative dancer and buried according to his most famous move?
 
Mar 2018
984
UK
If he was a yogi or monk, he may have renounced worldly possessions, so the absence of artifacts might actually fit with that theory (not that I believe it).
Sure. What I meant is there ought to be other evidence in the burial that he was a yogi or foreign monk rather than a local. For example, does his burial have any similarity what-so-ever with burials of Indian yogi's in India from around this time period? Note that the vaguely-lotus-like position is not evidence of this, as it wasn't customary in India.
 

Yôḥānān

Ad Honorem
Feb 2012
3,913
Portugal
I have another idea. This was a person of no real consequence and his burial was more functional than ceremonial. Imagine if he were lowered into his grave vertically instead of horizontally. One person on each side of the grave each grab an arm and lower him in feet first. His legs bend as his body is lowered down and his arms are just let go and flop to the sides.
To discuss your suggestion it would require going to the field with a measuring tape, dig some holes, and see how it went. Not to mention that I'm commenting this issue without any knowledge of how Roman burials took place.
You appear to have not read my post, or misunderstood it. Nobody can show the theory (whether it is yours or not is of no particular relevance) is wrong. It's pretty much impossible to prove a negative in this situation. But it's absurdly unlikely. Maybe I should start a thread asking for somehow to show that he wasn't an interpretative dancer and buried according to his most famous move?
Don't understand very well your argument since there might be evidence that renders some theories highly unlikely. Imagine this was a well known and documented position for pythagorean burials, then it would make no sense to claim it was a yogi from India. On the other hand if this was a well known and documented burial position for Hindus and Buddhists then no matter how far away from India it is one might hypothesize such a scenario.
 
Mar 2018
984
UK
On the other hand if this was a well known and documented burial position for Hindus and Buddhists then no matter how far away from India it is one might hypothesize such a scenario.
But it isn't, as was discussed on the first page of this thread. Unless, of course, you want hard proof that this was never used in India. But that's asking to prove a negative again, which is still logically impossible.

You can't just keep bringing up hypotheticals to push the discussion back. There is simply no reason to lend the theory the slightest bit of credence.