Dec. 4th 1619, Pre-Pilgrims Thanksgiving day, after Coronado's 1541, America is a Hispanic Nation?

The Peace of God to all that belong to the Lightness
Dear Readers,
Today December 4th if America decides to honor the arrival of the First Englishmen to its east coast must be considered as its truly Thanksgiving day, and not the one we celebrated just 10 days ago.

Please check:
tourlocal.virginiainteractive.org...

In 1619, the ship Margaret of Bristol, England sailed for Virginia under Captain John Woodliffe and brought thirty-eight settlers to the new Town and Hundred of Berkeley.

Please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

The London Company proprietors instructed the settlers that

"the day of our ships arrival . . . shall be yearly and perpetually kept as a day of Thanksgiving." The Margaret landed her passengers at Berkeley Hundred on December 4, 1619. The settlers did indeed celebrate a day of "Thanksgiving",

establishing the tradition two years and 17 days before the Pilgrims arrived aboard the Mayflower at Plymouth, Massachusetts to establish their Thanksgiving Day in 1621.

Please check: en.wikipedia.org...

Why America gives too much attention to the arrival of the settlers brought by the Plymouth Company and not by the ones that came before with the London Company?, that is first question that is good to ask in this interesting situation.

It is in the arrival of The Margaret ship landing her passengers at Berkeley Hundred that this tradition started to be practiced in the original thirty colonies soil.

Now, if that date is accepted as the truly Thanksgiving day America would appear as a nation created by Episcopalian settlers and not really hardcore Protestant ones, that could be an explanation of why it is selectively diminished by politically manipulated Historians.

There is enough evidence to suggest that also there was another Thanksgiving day before, in the mid Atlantic region, occurred somewhere in the Delaware valley, in Pennsylvania, not so far from Philadelphia, in which Swedish settlements were established first time around 1610s.

Please read:
en.wikipedia.org...-2

Why then Historians insist to focus attention in Pilgrims arriving more than a decade after? Perhaps since if we give credit to that first European colony America would become a Nation founded by Scandinavians and not by Anglo-Saxons.

Now, even that one was not the first Truly American Thanksgiving day, who was in May 29th of 1541 when the forces of the Spaniard Conqueror Francisco Coronado celebrated the foundation of the first settlement on Texas soil with a solemn mass. That was the real first occasion in which Europeans met aborigines to peacefully celebrate together friendship in USA soil.

Please check:
catholicism.org...

So the second curious question to ask is why we don't celebrate The American thanksgiving day on May 29th instead?

Of course to deny importance to May 29th as the truly Thanksgiving day in America is just a way to show that the country officially honor just the British arrival but not the Hispanic one, that was more than 120 years before.

So a logical answer is that otherwise America as a nation might appear to be in its very deep roots founded by Hispanic Catholic people interacting with native Americans, thing that is historically true.

This is a crucial topic to talk about in times we are approaching the beginning of a rule that has not hidden their ties with southern ethnical white supremacy political rhetoric.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness

Well, I am from Bristol, England and I have never heard of the Margaret.

The Fact John Cabot sailed from Bristol and discovered New Foundland, probably a few hundred noted years after the Vikings, on the Mathew, is one thing.

Maybe the aldermen of the county of Bristol are ensuring it never becomes public knowledge that we were responsible for the Native American's demise???

To be fair, they never take the blame for anything.

God fearing English people drove a hard stake into America. They tried socialism and it FAILED. From there they branched out because of lazy dirt bags not wanting to do anything but exist on the backs of workers.

Native Americans were not going to do anything in terms of advancing society. Not happy how their existence ended but it had to be done. They were going nowhere.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Well, it is true that Ancient Scandinavians preceded for centuries any other Europeans to arrive to America, there are sagas that suggest this may have occurred around the year 1000, by an expedition leaded by leif Erickson, the son of Erick the red, a famous Viking Chief.

Please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

Even in Canada, in New Foundland there are remains in L'Anse aux Meadow of a Viking settlement that it is believed correspond to Vinland that was the colony of Leif Erickson about the year 1000 AD.
please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

Now, new archaeological findings in Point Rosee, Notice the similitude of the name with the world Rossia, the way Vikings named Russia, suggest even Erickson was not the first to come to Canada, since the C14 dating open the possibility that the colony was there since the year 800 AD.

Please check: en.wikipedia.org...

The problem here is that first there is no evidence that the Viking colonies really were able to expand to USA soil, until now this seems to be a valid colonial project but in Canadian territory.

please check:
en.wikipedia.org...

Second, we don't have evidence that they were able to remain there longer to be represent a continuous line of cultural influence to be traced until more modern times.

If any of the previous two questions can be answered satisfactorily that would show that first Thanksgiving day was a Viking one, since there are relying accounts that show Erickson converted in to Christianism before to come to Greenland, he even came in a missionary trip commissioned by the king of Norway.

Nevertheless, this also should be a Roman Catholic or An Eastern Orthodox Thanksgiving day, since at that time, five centuries before Martin Luther, Christian Scandinavians were of any of the two faiths.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

originally posted by: LifeMode
God fearing English people drove a hard stake into America. They tried socialism and it FAILED. From there they branched out because of lazy dirt bags not wanting to do anything but exist on the backs of workers.

Native Americans were not going to do anything in terms of advancing society. Not happy how their existence ended but it had to be done. They were going nowhere.

I do love that story, they tried socialism for what 2 years and most of them died, then because it sucked so bad they gave people property rights and they had plentiful harvest, women once too tired and children to frail suddenly went to the fields once they retained ownership of their labor.

Does it matter? Even the so-called 'Native' Americans came from Asia (Not a theory; it's nailed by DNA.) So they get First Prize. Now, who else? Leif Erickson, the Templars? They were latecomers. There is good evidence for other Europeans, even Romans digging for copper in Canada, not to mention a whole slough of Asians of one sort or another, got to America well before Columbus. Africans very likely got to South America, too. Migration of people is not atypical. The only reason we celebrate one over the other is because one stuck in the record and one didn't. Although Columbus is currently in the doghouse as not PC, the reason he's a bigger deal than some homely shipwrecked sailor from who knows where is because he went back and told everybody, and this time he was believed so that TPTB in Europe finally got it into their noggins that there was a New World over here. Before that they either flat out didn't know, or they forgot. So we don't celebrate the Roanoke Colony because they, like, disappeared.

it's just like Jesus. (Doesn't matter whether you are a believer.) The Winter Solstice was co-opted into his birthday and the Spring Equinox, the beginning of Spring and a new life, is the Resurrection. It's symbolic, not real, and as long as you pick a day, it doesn't really matter. That people insist it does is just politics.

originally posted by: The angel of light
The Peace of God to all that belong to the Lightness
Dear Readers,
Today December 4th if America decides to honor the arrival of the First Englishmen to its east coast must be considered as its truly Thanksgiving day, and not the one we celebrated just 10 days ago.

That's not what Thanksgiving is about.

Thanksgiving is a celebration of the harvest year

You may be thinking of Columbus day, which is supposed to be the date of the first arrival in America (but which, of course, is not.)

There's a folktale/pseudo-history about it - how the Pilgrims arrived, crops failed, a man named Squanto showed up bringing food and helping them with contact with local Indians. And how after the hard winter they had a successful summer and celebrated with a feast of thanks (the "modern" description of peace and fellowship is a bit at odds with the tense situation of the real original feasht.)

The date we use was set by Abraham Lincoln.

a reply to: jellyrev

With all respect dear jellyrev,

The statement of Lifemode, not concerning English socialism or imperialism, I don't discuss that point, but about native Americans apart to be of course barbarian, due to his absolute ignorance of how cultures evolve, it is of course diametrically opposite to the reality, extremely false.

Tiahuanacans, Moche, Chimu peoples of Peru as well as the Teotihuacans of Mexico had reached a level of technology similar to ancient Egyptians.

Muisca, Quimbaya, Calima and Tayrona peoples of Colombia had arrived to similar progression of ancient Persians and Medes of Iran, the Scythians of Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Russia or the ancient peoples of Japan, especialy in metallurgy.

The ancient Amazonians of Beni in Bolivia and the Zenu of the Colombian Caribbean had irrigation systems as impressive as the Babilonian or ancient Han ones.

The Toltecs, Mixtecs,Zapotecs, Totonacs had already a civilization level as rich as of the ancient Greeks or Cyprusians.

Mayas of Guatemala, Honduras, Chiapas and Yucatan didn't had something really positive to envy to the ancient Chin dinasty, well from our always violent western mentality we can say that possibly only gun powder.

Many of the achievements of Olmecs in Tehuantepec were similar than the ancient Mojenjo Daro of India, as well as the Chilean Megalithic colosal statues of Easter Island and Huila Masciff of Colombia surpass what ever was built by ancient British people in Stonehenge.

Aztecs were in clear way to be the Romans of the new world, but any serious Historian can see that Rome never in his most glorious time supported a population as large as the one Hernan Cortes found when he arrived to Mexico-Tenochtitlan. Anyway the Incas of Peru were even more advanced in to have an empire as large as the Roman, although Cuzco was not as impressive as The Mexican capital

Of course Native Americans were relatively less advance, but they were the last, together with native Canadians to arrive to this Continent, before the Europeans. Also they were not all at the same level, Anasazi civilization of New Mexico could be the Summerians or Akadians of this continent .

If somebody has doubt of the viability of a Great Civilization from the native Americans just look what it has been Russia, that is a nation built with very similar ethnical elements. They have built a country larger than any other in History, pushed Chemistry and Mathematics as no other culture and reached the outer space before than anybody else.

All those potentially glorious civilizations became collapsed by a hord of new Cnivas, Rhauses or Attilas that came from the other side of the Atlantic, in misery, many of them completelly illiterate escaping from tyrannies, unending wars, terrible plagues and starvation caused by the over population of Europe, primarily with their arrogance, extreme violence and thirst
for gold to bring to this continent.

A Good question here to ask is Who were the barbarians? Atahualpa de noble last Inca or Pizarro the illiterate bandit that kidnapped him for a room of gold?

Ask that to an ancient Greek,Roman, or Cartagian and point your finger to one of the Anglo Saxon white supremacists of today and a native American, and without doubt they would select the first and probably they would be doubtful about the second or say that is an Atlant.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Tenochiltlan is impressive in its size and scale, and its unique geographic location(an island) and climate allowed for such a special place to be made. City comparison is one thing but at peak of power the Aztec empire was nowhere's near The peak of the Roman empire in nearly any metric. The population is 15 million for the aztecs to at minimum 50 million for the romans, a 1000 years difference where human population was much larger later.
They were both warrior societies with lots of sacrifices both had gladiator style executions.

I have no clue what Russia has to do with this. what ethical elements? Russia claimed land and took it from natives just like the western powers, what are you getting at, Heck Russia even owned Alaska part of the new world.
A large portion of Russia has been unlivable until modern times, it was easy pickings especially with china down for 100's of years.

a reply to: jellyrev

Possibly it is more appropiate to compare Mexico-Tenochtitlan with the city State of Cartage, since the Inca Empire is the one that best resembles the Roman Empire in the new world.

The sources of the Russian Civilization are the Tartars, Scythians and Mogols of the stepes in permanent contact with the Norse, Helenic, Iranian and Chinese ones, and of course became the modern continuators of the Bizantine empire.

All those cultures from whom they evolved were more than just great land conquerors, were sophisticate trading nations that created a great cultural bridge between midleast, Fareast and Europe.

That is precisely their power culturally, to be able to integratte the best of three so rich poles of civilization with a nomadic life preserved until the cossaks of today.

It is that mobility the one that allow them to combine inventions and developments in such a way that who were illeterate peoples in the 980s, when Prince Vladimir of Kiev became Orthodox Christian converted by Byzantine misioneers by the XVIII, 700 hundred years later, turned to be the most magnificent empire that ever existed and in the XX century sucessfully sent spacecrafts to the moon and venus as well as launched space stations in orbit.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

It is not only the Anasazi or Pueblo civilization who had tremendous potential of cultural evolution in America, it is the entire set of mound builder cultures of the Midwest and East coast.

The arrival of millions of Europeans as a giant destructive tsunami wave harassed not only nomadic peoples, it is likely to have crashed also great cultural centers.

Cahokia that was a prosperous city of 40000 inhabitants in XIII century, built by the platform mound mississipians could be still inhabited when the thirteen colonies became independent.

There are also many things to clarify also of what happened with Hopewell culture, the Adenas, the Caddoans, effigie mound civilization of ohio with their great city of Fort Ancient, as well as Baytown, Markville, or the cone mound civilizations of Virginia and Appalachians of Florida.

There were mound builders in Louisiana since 3500 BC, the Paquemine civilization even preceding the construction of the pyramids of Egypt. We know from reliable accounts of the Spanish Conquerors expeditions of Juan Pardo, Jose Maria Narvaez and Hernando de Soto that those Aborigines were still there in XVI century.

The tale that America was still in XIX century basically a large portion of almost uninhabited land with few tribes of primitive Neanderthal looklike cavemen is a chimera, more an invention of the propaganda machine used to justify a brutal genocide to unify the continent politically than what the reality was.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

The Catholics stole Christmas off the pagans
Don't seem to be worried about that much

The Catholic Church should clear up the lie and give it back and tell the truth, nobody knows when Christ was born

Just another historical mistake, or maybe a lie

I guess if thanksgiving is Hispanic then the Catholic Church is pagan

a reply to: Raggedyman

Well,

The celebration of Christmas on December 25th is not exclusive of Roman Catholicism, is shared by the entire Western Christianism, including all the churches that came out from the Protestant schism and the Church of England one.

Only the Eastern Orthodox, The Coptics and the Armenians don't follow this and place the birth in between January 6th to 28th. This means that if we follow your line of reasoning a Protestant, or Episcopalian Thanksgiving is as pagan as a Catholic one, though i am not saying that I support your point of view.

Now, considering that Europe was invaded by pagan Barbarians this is not really a thief of anything, it is more a question of survival, they had the political power and the Church needed to be able to survive in some way. To adapt their winter festival into the birth of Jesus was a very intelligent diplomatic move.

The idea of December 25th was to adapt a pagan festival of arrival of winter into a Christian Holiday, this happened after the western Roman Empire collapsed under the invasion of the Germanic tribes known in History as the Barbarians( Goths, Visigoths, Vandals, Suevi, etc) .

Considering the fact that one of the few things we know about the birth of Christ is that it took place Not in Winter, the gospel accounts are clear that it was not cold outdoors, so the shepherd were still late in the open country with their animals and not sheltered with them in caves, the point is when it was? we have two possiblities Summer or Fall.

Now, from what the ancient Christian traditions of the middle east we know, including the gospel of St Luke and that also match with the minor gospels accounts is that Jesus was conceived about six months later of his cousin John the Baptist.

Fortunately for us, there has been a way to determine the time in which John was conceived, from the service of the priests turn to which his father Zachariah belonged to, that is around June.

Since Elizabeth (John’s mother) was in her sixth month of pregnancy when Jesus was conceived (Luke 1:24-36), we can determine the approximate time of year Jesus was born if we know when John was born. John’s father, Zacharias, was a priest serving in the Jerusalem temple during the course of Abijah (Luke 1:5). Historical calculations indicate this course of service corresponded to June 13-19 in that year ( The Companion Bible, 1974, Appendix 179, p. 200).

This means John was born in March, under the sign of Piscis, that in astrology is always considered as the priesthood one and Jesus might have been conceived around December, so if he was a nine months baby, and the gospels don't say nothing against it, he was born on Late August or September, under the sign of Leo, the astrological one of rulers.

Please check:
www.reviveourhearts.com...

Apocalypses or Revelation of St John, 5, v.4: I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it .
v 5: One of the elders said to me, “Weep no more; behold, [and here’s the name] the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.”

There are many metaphoric references of the incoming Messiah since he ancient prophets scriptures calling him the Lion of Judah, so a birth in the sign of Leo matches with them.

Please Check:
www.ucg.org...

Thanks for your comment,

The Angel of Lighrtness

Why we celebrate thanksgiving when we do:

- In the US we employed holidays that cemented a national identity. Until the civil war, the big debate in the US was federalism vs antifederalism. The civil war put that argument to rest....but there are national holidays meant to bring the nation together more tightly. Build our national identity.

- all modern holidays usurp older holidays. For Thanksgiving, its the celebration of the end of harvest. Its not about giving thanks to the indians (we definitely should....they were helpful [in exchange for firearms] in keeping Europeans alive in the early days). Its about giving thanks to whoever the deity of the harvest is/was. As hunter gatherers, humans likely didn't do harvest celebrations annually. In fact, hunter gatherers likely didn't have the regimented deities you see in agrarian societies, where male/female duality is a center point

a reply to: The angel of light

I am happy to celebrate the Christmas season with pagans, they have never asked me not to
I know it's a Catholic lie to trick people

Jesus wasn't born January or December, shepherds are not out with their flocks that late in the year due to poor weather in those months, I am happy to dismiss your astrology as a cult belief, you must be joking with that information

Thanks for your comments anyway
I think you are a very genuine person, just pray you might one day see that the church, Protestant or Catholic, is full of liars and manipulates more concerned with their own power than your soul

Thanksgiving itself, nobody owns it, it's a celebration to God, not to a church
It seems you want the glory to go to a church, your church, instead of God
Seems you are jealous you don't get the recognition you deserve, you don't get to be important.
You are lost in religion, that's a bad place to be
Think about it

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't think somebody here has suggested that it was a kind of way white settlers created to thanks the aborigines for their hospitality, it was a thanksgiving ceremony to God for the all what nature has provided, for the crops and animals that were received.

It is irrelevant if the Native Americans had a different concept of God than the Europeans. It was a way to establish the concept of one country with religious freedom but united by the belief in a creator, something very characteristic of the American national identity.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: Raggedyman

Well Reggedyman,

The principle of Thanksgiving is imprinted in the collective unconscious since the humanity exist. There was thanksgiving in many rituals of the native cultures of this continent.

The legend of El Dorado is a good example, all that gold was not really a jewelry for ornate the body, niether a currency, it was offered to the divinity in the high Andes lakes, as a sacrifice of exvotes to give thanks for favors already received.

Ancient inhabitants of Central Colombia decided at some point to change human sacrifices for a kind of offer that they believed it was more proper and acceptable for the Gods: objects of Gold, that was considered as the seed of life.

Gold was seen as condensation of the divine power, of its grace, on the surface of the earth, it was the tears of the Gods.

Please check:

science.nationalgeographic.com...

www.doaks.org...

www.ancient-origins.net...

It is interesting to see how Aborigines of South America invested so much time, artwork and also energy in to carryout rites that were basically their way to thanksgiving the Gods for all what they have achieved.

Thanksgiving practices were established long before the arrival of Europeans so you are right when you say that it was not exclusively a Christian costume, and it was present in paganism too.

Now, the simple act of Thanksgiving has a tremendous power to release creative energy, to boost mental energy that the subconscious can gather from the collective Unconscious, the so called Akasic records, a reservoir of infinite wisdom and knowledge, beyond time and space limits, and so of infinite power to find the solution of any problem.

This was a core principle of the Shamanic practices, that of course were all based on deep knowledge of the power that exist on the power of belief under Hypnosis, the art to transform thought in action.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness

I would like to add a little something, the northern european pagan winter festivals, DO NOT CELEBRATE THE ARRIVAL OF WINTER, they mark the coming end of winter and the return of the sun.
They are all on or after the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year.
With respect to the germanic people, they would gather in the village center and and burn a huge log, the yule log, to light the longest night of the year.

I have read somewhere that there was a tradition in the northern levant, (lebanon mountains) where on the winter solstice a cedar was cut and set alight, again to light the longest night of the year.
The association with xmas and light, and christ being the son of light, makes it pretty easy to conflate the differing dates, whether or not christ was born during the season.
In fact i found this little gem on when christ was actually born in march.

Contemporary records (Josephus) tell us that Herod died shortly after an eclipse of the Moon visible in Palestine (occurring on March 13, 4 B.C.), but before the feast of Passover (occurring on April 10, 4 B.C.).34 Clearly Christ could not have been born on April 24, 4 B.C., the date Morehouse assigned to the Korean po-hsing, which falls too late. We therefore can assume that Christ was born sometime in March, 5 B.C., when the Chinese hui-hsing was first sighted (sometime between March 10–April 7, 5 B.C.), marking that event. Then, also, we can propose that: (1) Gabriel appeared to Mary and she conceived in August, 6 B.C. (2) Since Mary had to wait 41 days before offering a sacrifice for her "uncleanness" (from the birth of a son), the family probably visited the Temple in Jerusalem in late April, 5 B.C. (3) Requiring some 47-60 days to travel from the East to Palestine, following Jesus' birth and the appearance of the bright nova, the Magi must have arrived at Jerusalem and Bethlehem to visit the new king in May, 5 B.C. Immediately, thereafter, Joseph fled with Mary and the Child to Egypt. (4) Because they did not return to Palestine until after Herod's death, Joseph and his family must have stayed in Egypt for around 10 months, before returning to Nazareth, perhaps in late March, 4 B.C., after Herod's death – Jesus now being around one year old.

epistle.us...

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I don't think somebody here has suggested that it was a kind of way white settlers created to thanks the aborigines for their hospitality, it was a thanksgiving ceremony to God for the all what nature has provided, for the crops and animals that were received.

It is irrelevant if the Native Americans had a different concept of God than the Europeans. It was a way to establish the concept of one country with religious freedom but united by the belief in a creator, something very characteristic of the American national identity.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

But it wasn't established in as a national holiday America until the time of Abraham Lincoln, as i said earlier.