Starseed theory

Originally posted by Harte
Of course, it would depend on your definition of civilization.

and

Also, to the other poster, I don't care what you say about Fell, he's a con man. And last time I checked, nobody had translated the glyphs (Rongorongo script) at Easter Island.

Harte

So First Harte, I ask a question and it is not in Jest. I only wish to see what you define things as.

Would the Aborigines of Austrailia be defined as a civilization?

My Personal View is they are a civilization, but thats your point, isn't it.

And for Barry Fell, thats obivously your view, which I therefore need to respect, despite having the exact opposite view on this as you do.

I had a C Band Sat Dish, many years ago that accessed all the birds, and aired channels.

During this time, I found one which offer documentaries on topics such as the Lost Tribes, Ancient American Peoples and Foreign Visitors. Many various topic where covered, but most dealt with the North American aspect.

There where various shows where Barry was the Main Guest and was detailing one thing or another. I listened and watched what was offered and I believe he was expressing his Opinion as he made clear. He noted what other before him offered, and explained why they came to those conclusions. He also offered what he believed the translation where, and explained how he made those conclusions.

With respect to Easter Island, the Elder's had both the Script and Oral Traditions of their history. It was strange that they did not have a full knowledge of their own language. Their leader expressed his concerns in respects to what people had previously suggested the Scripts noted. It did not completely agree with what they had been told of their history.

Barry's review of their Scripts, and the corrections in grammer others should have considered, allowed him to translate these scripts to the point where they Elders noted this was what the Oral Traditions taught.

My point here is, I can choose to do two things here. I can accept what Barry Fell has suggested or accept what someone else has suggested.

But, I'll take the polite, informative and well spoken over the slanderous, insulting and frightened anyday. One who is offering verbal abuse, rather than offering an explaination as to how a conclusion has been obtained is one who can not be trusted.

I am trying to recall what the station was, since I believe it still is operating. Thank's to Fox, and Scrambling of Feeds for aquiring broadcast rights to the NFL, the whole system became a Scramble system
with the P4V, Movie Networks, and Networks following suit. It got to the point where nothing but a few channels worked, but that was some 15 years or so ago.

Have a Crappy Mini Dish now with nothing more than sanitized viewing. Nothing the CRTC (in Canada) and the FCC in the US has not preapproved for the sheep. I guess that's another topic

Sorry, but I digress.

So, you may hold to you view of Barry Fell, and I trust you can allow me mine. I know we both agree Ogham is from 700 to 500 BC and has no point being presented as a link to Atlantis.

So have a good evening Harte, and did you find those keys?

Ciao

Originally posted by Harte
Plato pretty clearly places the end of Atlantis at around 9500 BC, this predates basically every single civilization known to us. Of course, it would depend on your definition of civilization.

Nomadic tribes chasing their cattle across the steppes, maybe. Cities, manufacturing, trade of goods and services? Almost certainly not.

The Minoans came literally millenia later.

If you want to place Atlantis at 950 BC, in defiance of Plato, and without any reason, then that's your Atlantis, not Plato's. But even if you do, just because it was pre-Hellenic, that by no means indicates that it was pre-anybody else. A large, rich and powerful civilization cannot have existed at that time without leaving a trace. And I don't necessarily mean just ruins. I mean records among the other civilizations that were around at that time, in the same part of the world.

There is no mention of Atlantis anywhere in the ancient world until Plato brings it up in two of his dialogues.

Ok... I did ask to disregard Plato only for the moment. I have every intention of discussing this. As I said I am breaking this down one thing at a time.

My question regarding Cretan civilisation and Plato's theory, is this correct?

Also, to the other poster, I don't care what you say about Fell, he's a con man. And last time I checked, nobody had translated the glyphs (Rongorongo script) at Easter Island.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.omniglot.com...
www.netaxs.com...
www.pacificislandtravel.com... ongo.asp
A couple of those links may claim that the script has been (at least partially) deciphered, but these "translations" haven't been generally accepted as accurate.
You'd be extremely hard pressed to even find the name "Fell" at any website regarding this text (unless, of course, the website is actually about Fell.) Your claim about this shyster is sounding very similar to Sitchen's claim that he is the only one in the world that can "properly" translate Sumerian cuneiform script.
About Fell:
The following links are in reference to the very subject at hand, the Ogham script, and Fell's claims to have found it in America:
cwva.org...
cwva.org...
cwva.org...
These links concern Fell's "work" in other areas:
ydli.org...
www.ramtops.co.uk...

All of the above came from Doug's Archaeology Site. I told you to save it! Harte

So does this debunk the North American/Ogham findings? I must admit, as I am going through this, I am really surprised that the Minoan language hasn't been deciphered and research into Nth American/ogham sites haven't been thoroughly investigated?

In terms of civilization, my focus is with the bronze age. Archaeological artefacts found during Minoan suggest quite an advanced technology. I will add to this later today...

cheers

Originally posted by Shane
I know we both agree Ogham is from 700 to 500 BC and has no point being presented as a link to Atlantis.

Hello, well at this stage I am not convinced either way. I really am sitting on the fence with this one. I will demostrate why I feel that way later today.

Before I continue I would like to illustrate the limitations with archaeology relative to the various dating techniques…c 14 > the problem with radiocarbon dating is that as the sample gets older there is progressively less c 14 to be measured and any contamination will have increasingly dramatic effects on the estimated date. The estimated date will be doubtful as the question exists – How much c14 remains to be measured in very old samples? AND has the carbon been contaminated with younger carbon?

Now, you may be jumping up and down right now saying ‘thermoluminescence dating techniques are reliable and accurate but and there is always a but!

Several technical difficulties apply to luminescence methods. An inherent problem concerns the annual environmental dose rate, which can be measured in the field or laboratory and which introduces the largest uncertainties into the method. For instance, substantial variability has been observed in K, Th and U, the principal sources of the environmental dose rate (Dunnell and Feathers 1994). Indeed, variations in sedimentary K may be directly related to former human occupation. For a field measurement the dosimeter would have to be placed virtually in the same location as the sample for a year, which is physically not feasible. Another difficulty concerns the moisture content, an important factor that cannot effectively be determined for the duration of the time in question.

Then there are specific problems relating to dating that relies on measurements taken from saprolithic or regolithic sediments, i.e. sediments that comprise grains from rock that decomposed in situ within the sediment. Ref

Significant errors through the misinterpretation attributable to this effect have already occurred in rock art dating, notably at the Australian site Jinmium. Here, archaeologists using TL analysis claimed an age of 58 000 to 75 000 years for petroglyphs that were clearly and obviously of the Holocene (Fullagar et al. 1996), and were subsequently shown to be so (Roberts et al. 1998). Such cases can readily be clarified by using OSL analysis instead, measuring each quartz grain separately and then discarding those results that are distinctly greater than the main cluster of data.

However, OSL dating, too, is not without significant qualifications. In TL dating it is traditionally customary to remove the outermost 2 mm of samples in the darkroom, to eliminate the need to account for dose rate alpha and beta radiation. This only penetrates to a depth in the order of microns, whereas gamma rays penetrate very much deeper. In the case of single-grain OSL analysis, this is obviously not possible, the grains are as a rule well under one millimetre in size. Recommended reading!

There are limitations with ALL dating techniques and it is for this reason alone that I am skeptical about ‘dates’…
Archaeology does provide evidence that illustrates what the Bronze Age was capable of. For illustration purposes Knossos

I hope this explains where my head is at? Quite simply, I am not convinced that the Druids or Ogham were NOT present during the Hellenic period or for that matter, the Pre Hellenic period.


Moving on….

Minoan culture is at the 'harte' of the Plato theory...please sing out if I am misinformed or have left something out! (Disclaimer: Sorry, but couldn't resist the play on words, hope you don't find it offensive, because it wasn't meant in that way)

Archaeological records show that the Minoan culture spread its dominion throughout the nearby islands of the Aegean, very roughly from 3000 years BC to about 1400 years BC. Crete, now part of Greece, was the capital for the Minoan people ‹ an advanced civilization with language, commercial shipping, complex architecture, ritual and games. Ref

Many ancient Greek myths take their location from Minoan Crete more than ten centuries before Plato. Daedalus, the ancient scientist, was supposedly the architect of the palace at Knossos Ref

Minoan culture extended across the island of Crete, with most of its developments along the northern coast of Crete. But, after more than a thousand years of dominance, the Minoan culture came to an abrupt end, circa 1470 BC. Ref

I did note earlier that Plato was the only person to have mentioned Atlantis...what about Aristotle? Have you heard of this?

Aristotle wrote of a large island in the Atlantic Ocean that the Carthaginians knew as Antilia. Proclus, the commentator of "Timaeus" mentions that Marcellus, relying on ancient historians, stated in his Aethiopiaka that in the Outer Ocean (which meant all oceans, not just the Atlantic) there were seven small islands dedicated to Persephone, and three large ones; one of these, comprising 1,000 stadia in length, was dedicated to Poseidon. Proclus tells us that Crantor reported that he, too, had seen the columns on which the story of Atlantis was preserved as reported by Plato: the Saite priest showed him its history in hieroglyphic characters. Some other writers called it Poseidonis after Poseidon. Plutarch mentions Saturnia or Ogygia about five days' sail to the west of Britain. He added that westwards from that island, there were the three islands of Cronus, to where proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands, in order to offer sacrifice to the gods of the ocean. Ref

Is this to be disregarded?

The latter part of the quote definitely supports the ogham theory for me. Perhaps it isnt conclusive…but is anything?

cheers

Originally posted by NJE777
Before I continue I would like to illustrate the limitations with archaeology relative to the various dating techniques…

...There are limitations with ALL dating techniques and it is for this reason alone that I am skeptical about ‘dates’…

...I hope this explains where my head is at? Quite simply, I am not convinced that the Druids or Ogham were NOT present during the Hellenic period or for that matter, the Pre Hellenic period.

NJE777,
like the rest of science, when several methods converge on one thing, that thing is considered to be true, that is until somebody shows differently. There may be some sites that have been dated using only one method, but most have been dated using every possible method. When these methods agree to within calibration error, then the site's calculated date is considered correct. C14 dating used to be much worse than it is today. Other dating methods have allowed scientists to create a calibration system for C14 base on real, true dating methods (like tree rings, for example, which we have a record of extending as far back as you are talking about.)
Of course, the tree ring method is only good if you can find wood from the era and only if that wood carries the mark of a general environmentally important event - these don't happen all the time and some wood is grown and harvested "in between" such events. But this sort of certain dating, when it can be used, allows scientist to calibrate their C14 dates by conducting c14 testing on the pieces of wood that have been positively dated by the ring method. Eventually, they ended up with a fairly good calibration system for C14 this way. Not to imply that the tree ring method was the only one used to generate this calibration "table", just that it's the most accurate one. For earlier dates, other methods must be considered.

So, while it may be true that dating systems aren't perfect, you can pretty much consider them reliable within the error margin they give. Especially when three or more different methods arrive at similar results.

It is extremely ironic that you would bring this up anyway. The only way this could possibly impact your theory is if the dates given show artifacts to be younger than they actually are. The irony is that this argument is usually used to show that the dating systems err in the other direction. That is, the results show artifacts to be older than they actually are. This is the argument typically advanced by fundamentalist Christian Creationists!

Originally posted by NJE777
Minoan culture is at the 'harte' of the Plato theory...please sing out if I am misinformed or have left something out!

(Disclaimer: Sorry, but couldn't resist the play on words, hope you don't find it offensive, because it wasn't meant in that way)

Not at all! And I can absolutely agree that the Minoan culture is (possibly) part of the basis for Plato's fictional account. I've said many times that the ancient Greeks obviously knew of earlier civilizations that had been lost, through whatever means. I mean, just seeing some ruins is enough to get the speculation started. When Thera went, it likely wiped out a fairly sophisticated civilization there, and they were part of the Minoans. Tidal waves could have wiped out the rest of the Minoans, they're still figuring that out, last I heard. Anyway, the idea of a huge natural disaster, coupled with the end of a civilization, was not unknown to the Greeks. Plato used this idea in his story because of the way it would resonate, partially anyway.

Originally posted by NJE777I did note earlier that Plato was the only person to have mentioned Atlantis...what about Aristotle? Have you heard of this?

Aristotle wrote of a large island in the Atlantic Ocean that the Carthaginians knew as Antilia.

I've seen that statement made about Aristotle before. I've never seen a reference for it, but I can give you what I have found on it:

On these grounds, in all the former maps and charts, certain islands were placed in that direction. In his book concerning the wonderful things of nature, Aristotle informs us of a report, that some Carthaginian merchants had sailed across the Atlantic to a most beautiful and fertile island, of which we shall give a more particular account hereafter. Some Portuguese cosmographers have inserted this island in their maps under the name of Antilla; though they do not agree with Aristotle in regard to its situation, yet none have placed it more than 200 leagues due west from the Canaries and Azores. This they assert to be certainly the island of the seven cities, which is said to have been peopled by the Portuguese in the year 714, at the time when Spain was conquered by the Moors. At that time, according to the legend, seven bishops with their people sailed to this island, where each of them built a city; and, that none of their people might ever think of returning to Spain, they burnt their ships with all the tackling, and destroyed every thing that was necessary for navigation.

Also:

the admiral (EDIT: He means Columbus here - Harte) was led to believe that he had formed a sound opinion on this subject; and he was much encouraged to undertake his proposed voyage of discovery by his contemporary Paul, physician to Signior Dominico of Florence...
The communications from Paul on this subject are as follow:
...From the island of Antilia, which you call the Seven Cities, and of which you have some knowledge, there are ten spaces in the chart to the most noble island of Cipango, which make 2500 miles or 875 leagues[6]. The island of Cipango abounds in gold, pearls and precious stones, and the people even cover their temples and palaces with plates of pure gold[7]. But, for want of knowing the way, all these wonderful things remain hidden and concealed, although they might easily be gone to with safety...


[align=center][6] The island Antilia, the name of which has been since adopted by the French for the smaller West India islands, was, like the more modern Terra Australia incognita, a gratuitous supposition for preserving the balance of the earth, before the actual discovery of America. Cipango was the name by which Japan was then known in Europe, from the relations of Marco Polo.--E.[/align]

This last part was the footnote to accompany the mention of Antilia in the text.
Source: HISTORY AND COLLECTION OF VOYAGES AND TRAVELS, ARRANGED IN SYSTEMATIC ORDER: FORMING A COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF NAVIGATION, DISCOVERY, AND COMMERCE, BY SEA AND LAND, FROM THE EARLIEST AGES TO THE PRESENT TIME.
BY ROBERT KERR, F.R.S. & F.A.S. EDIN.
VOL. III.
MDCCCXXIV.

Originally posted by NJE777

Proclus, the commentator of "Timaeus" mentions that Marcellus, relying on ancient historians, stated in his Aethiopiaka that in the Outer Ocean (which meant all oceans, not just the Atlantic) there were seven small islands dedicated to Persephone, and three large ones; one of these, comprising 1,000 stadia in length, was dedicated to Poseidon.

Check out how many times these sentences come up in this Google Search and note that the only term in the search box was "Aethiopiaka." Not sure if that means anything, except of course that apparently only one source exists for all these page's statements about the subject. Good luck finding the original!
Anyway, you and I are also "the commentator(s) of Timaeus," see, Proclus lived some 750 years after Plato, and wrote some of his works about Plato and his writings, mostly having to do with Plato's philosophy, the Platonic Ideals. But since you and I are (essentially) commenting on Timaeus ourselves, then we are also "commentators of Timaeus."
Anyway, I don't really care what Proclus had to say on the subject, if in fact he did say anything. Plenty of people have said plenty of things, and Proclus did come along 800 years later.
Oh yeah, and good luck finding the Aethiopiaka anywhere, I suppose Marcelluus (I hope he means the Roman General) might be the place to start. You already saw the result of an "Aethiopiaka" Google search.

Originally posted by NJE777

Proclus tells us that Crantor reported that he, too, had seen the columns on which the story of Atlantis was preserved as reported by Plato: the Saite priest showed him its history in hieroglyphic characters.

Is this to be disregarded?

I'd disregard it if I were you. We don't have any writings from Plato or any of his contemporaries that say that Plato was shown some history in Heiroglyphic characters. Plato never claimed to have personal knowledge of this. It was his claim, through his characters (in fact, his characters were real people, maybe it was their claim) that Solon has recieved this information.
Additionally, I wonder why Proclus has to tell us this 700 years after Crantor. What is his source? The claim is that the Romans destroyed the Egyptian records. Who destroyed Crantor's work, after the fifth century AD when Proclus wrote this?
At any rate, I said "no mention in ancient times until Plato". His contemporaries, or those that came after, commented (of course) on what Plato wrote. Why is it that nobody prior to Plato ever mentioned it?

Anyway, a bunch of different people mentioning islands in the Atlantic really means nothing, right? I mean, thereare islands in the Atlantic. Why shouldn't they mention them? What gets me is the way all these "Atlantis" websites cite these old texts about islands in the Atlantic like they are completely dependable testimony. Funny how these same websites never mention some of the other, outrageously ignorant things some of these same "sources" said in the very same literary works they so love to cite.

Harte

I will address each issue you have raised separately...that way I can keep focus.

Now,the Jinmium example illustrates the error with TL dating. That is the point I wanted to make.

I agree that dating techniques are, as you state:

reliable within the error margin they give, especially when three or more different methods arrive at similar results

But, I feel the limitations within the field of archaeology must be acknowledged in this discussion.

The dating of remains is essential in archaeology, in order to place finds in correct relation to one another, and to understand what was present in the experience of any human being at a given time and place. Inscribed objects sometimes bear an explicit date, or preserve the name of a dated individual. In such cases, dating might seem easy. However, only a small number of objects are datable by inscriptions, and there are many specific problems with Egyptian chronology, so that even inscribed objects are rarely datable in absolute terms. In the archaeology of part-literate societies, dating may be said to operate on two levels: the absolute exactness found in political history or 'history event-by-event', and the less precise or relative chronology, as found in social and economic history, where life can be seen to change with less precision over time.Dating in Egyptian Archaeology

The chronology in absolute numbers (year dates). For Egypt absolute year dates can only be established back to the beginning of the Late Period, from links to Greek chronology, and then from Assyrian king-lists and other Near Eastern sources, back to the Ramesside Period (still debated). For earlier periods there are several problems. The Egyptians dated by the year of reign of the king on the throne (for example 'year 3 of king X'). If we knew the precise length of reign for every Egyptian king, chronology would be no problem. However, we do not even know the number of kings for all periods, and there is also the possibility that reigns overlapped by coregency or in times of political disunity. For their own religious and administrative purposes, the Egyptians compiled lists of kings, sometimes with the exact length of reign. Fragments of such lists survived ('Palermo stone'); none of them is well enough preserved to solve every detail of absolute chronology..Dating in Egyptian Archaeology

As for dendrochronology, yes it can be very precise...but lol

For Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean, this method from European prehistory is currently under development.Dating in Egyptian Archaeology

Aegean Dendrochronology Project December 2004 Progress Report

Overview and Assessment of the Evidence for the Date of the Eruption of Thera

These results will contribute to a long lasting debate about validity of different relative chronologies in Egyptian ancient history, which in the second millennium differ for approximately 140 years. Vienna Institute for Archaeological Science, Dendrolab. c/o Inst. for Palaeontology, Vienna

The focus of interest is the dating of the volcanic eruption of Thera. Archaeologists date this event, which was the main reason for the loss of the hegemony of the Minoan culture, to be within the 16th/15th century BC, although there are different opinions. Warren and Cadogan date the eruption between 1550 and 1480 BC (Myers et al, 1992), Driessen and McDonald between 1550 and 1530 BC (Driessen, McDonald, 1995).


Status of Synchronisation of East Mediterranean Civilizations

As you can see dating in Egypt and in Thera is a work in progress and it is not without discrepancies. It is not absolute

Originally posted by Harte
I've seen that statement made about Aristotle before. I've never seen a reference for it, but I can give you what I have found on it:

Source: HISTORY AND COLLECTION OF VOYAGES AND TRAVELS, ARRANGED IN SYSTEMATIC ORDER: FORMING A COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF NAVIGATION, DISCOVERY, AND COMMERCE, BY SEA AND LAND, FROM THE EARLIEST AGES TO THE PRESENT TIME.
BY ROBERT KERR, F.R.S. & F.A.S. EDIN.
VOL. III.
MDCCCXXIV.

thank you for the reference

Yes, accessing accurate information is very frustrating at times...no references to rely on and it is so time consuming trying to source info that does provide references.

hey NJE777 here are some links you may find interesting, hope you havent already seen these

www.internetezy.com.au...

www.aboriginalartonline.com...

www.crystalinks.com...

members.ozemail.com.au...

www.awarenessquest.com...

www.crystalinks.com...

Im from the northern territory originally and have always had a fascination with aboriginal rock art/petroglyphs. You might find some research into the meanings of the myths and legends of the dreamtime rewarding, depending on the association's you may make? If you ever get a chance to visit Kakadu i would highly reccomend a visit to Nourlangie rock and some of the surrounding areas, magnificent artwork. i have some personal photos from my last trip there and if i can work out how to post them i will do so if your interested.

Cheers
M4S

thanks for the links!!

will check them out. Intend to focus on Indigenous astronomy at some point to discuss dogon & sirius...when I eventually get there

I would love to see the photos! My first degree is in Aboriginal Studies, Minor History, Major Law...so it is a personal interest of mine

thankyou

I would like to recap…

Firstly, I do think Ogham script has ties to the Hellenic period, hence Atlantis. We know that Caesar mentioned Ogham:

It is in all likelihood that we find the origins of Ogham linked with the Greek alphabet. The fact that Caesar mentions Ogham, is significant. After all, how could Caesar have known about it if it had not been invented yet? Ogham by R Gombach

This Celts were an oral culture:

Who were these Celts that used Ogham? As mentioned previously the Celts were an oral culture who had strict religious beliefs and doctrine expressly forbidding them to commit certain things to writing. Ogham by R Gombach

This is also officially recorded:

The Romans claimed that the Celts were elitists and would not commit anything to writing for fear that the information would become commonplace and available to all. Julius Caesar, in his description of the Celts in his Gallic War, writes that the Celts "consider it improper to commit their studies to writing," and he adds that they knew Greek letters and used these for "all other purposes. In Search of Ancient Ireland by Carmel McCaffrey and Leo Eaton. This book traces the history, archaeology, and legends of ancient Ireland from 9000 BC to 1167 AD when a Normans invaded Ireland

This logically tells you that the Celts guarded their culture and would only write in Greek for ‘all other purposes’…making it virtually impossible to source the origins of ogham…

There are no written records in Ireland before the arrival of Christianity in the fifth century In Search of Ancient Ireland by Carmel McCaffrey and Leo Eaton. This book traces the history, archaeology, and legends of ancient Ireland from 9000 BC to 1167 AD when a Normans invaded Ireland

Julius Caesar described as Celtae. The word "Celtic" came originally from the Greeks who, around 600 B.C.,called the people who lived to the north of Greece Keltoi. We know also from references in both Greek and Roman texts that they inhabited a large area in Central Europe. Archaeologists do not believe that the Celts were one homogeneous people but were composed of many tribes speaking a similar language. How these different tribes came to speak a common language is not known, but these various peoples, referred to as Celtic, spoke a language which was a predecessor of modern-day Irish. Thus the word "Celtic" became a way of describing the people who spoke the Gaelic language. In Search of Ancient Ireland by Carmel McCaffrey and Leo Eaton. This book traces the history, archaeology, and legends of ancient Ireland from 9000 BC to 1167 AD when a Normans invaded Ireland

This is reminiscent of the British labeling the Indigenous groups of AU ‘aborigines’ [sic].

In spite of the lack of archaeological evidence we do know that the Celtic language and culture came to Ireland. There is ample evidence to show that by around A.D. 100 Ireland was a Celtic speaking country. One major source in support of this is Ptolemy's map of Ireland dating to about A.D. 150, which shows the country to be Celtic speaking. Ptolemy was a Greek geographer, and Professor Donnchadh Ó Corráin, medieval historian at University College Cork, believes that this is the strongest evidence for the arrival of the Celtic or Gaelic language into Ireland. This is the first absolute proof that the language arrived, and linguistic scholars feel that it must have been well established by this time. The pre-Celtic language, whatever it was, was gone by this time, leaving only traces behind. These old texts also describe a Celtic society similar to that found on the Continent with comparable gods and goddesses. In Search of Ancient Ireland by Carmel McCaffrey and Leo Eaton. This book traces the history, archaeology, and legends of ancient Ireland from 9000 BC to 1167 AD when a Normans invaded Ireland

Further evidence is found in the mythology of the Greek & the Celts:

Zeus the Father made a third generation of mortal men, a brazen race, sprung from ash-trees Bronze Age

The twenty sacred trees of the Celts have symbolic meaning…

If one were to pick a region where the plants of the ogham were best represented, it would be the valley of the Rhine River Exploring the Origins of the Celtic Ogham

The human history of the Rhine begins with the writers of the late Roman Republic and early Roman Empire. Nearly all the classical sources mention the Rhine, and the name is always the same: Rhenus in Latin, Greek Rhenos. The Romans viewed the Rhine as the outermost border of civilization and reason, beyond which were mythical creatures and the wild Germans, not far themselves from being beasts of the wilderness they inhabited. As it was a wilderness, the Romans were eager to explore it. This view is typified by Res Gestae Divi Augusti, a long public inscription of Augustus in which he (or his ghost writer) boasts of his exploits, including sending an expeditionary fleet north of the Rhinemouth to Jutland, which no Roman had ever done (he says).
Throughout the long history of Rome, the Rhine was considered the border between Gaul or the Celts and the Germans, even though the border often was violated, as when the Germanics crossed it and joined with the Celts to form the Belgae (descending to Belgium). Typical of this point of view is a quote from Maurus Servius Honoratus, Commentary on the Aeneid of Vergil (On Book 8 Line 727):
"(Rhenus) fluvius Galliae, qui Germanos a Gallia dividit"
"(The Rhine is a) river of Gaul, which divides the Germans from Gaul." Rhine

“the human history of the Rhine begins with the writers of the late Roman Republic”… so the Celts only existed from when the Romans began to write about them? How is that possible or even logical?

I now refer to Aristotle and the Island of Antilia: Aristotle mentions proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands…

westwards from that island, there were the three islands of Cronus, to where proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands, in order to offer sacrifice to the gods of the ocean. Aristotle

Druid mythology also makes reference to water gods…

The Celts worshipped water gods and believed water to be sacred. Like trees and water the Druids held some islands to be sacred too. Druidism

I know this is based on similarities...and nothing conclusive...but is anything absolute with respect to mythology?

[edit on 15-4-2006 by NJE777]

hmm I was quite surprised by the similarity here...not sure of what the ogham diagram means but it looks like sacred geometry...just like the architecture of Atlantis...

edit: nothing to see here anymore folks...just move along!



[edit on 23-4-2006 by NJE777]

Originally posted by NJE777
I now refer to Aristotle and the Island of Antilia: Aristotle mentions proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands…

westwards from that island, there were the three islands of Cronus, to where proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands, in order to offer sacrifice to the gods of the ocean. Aristotle

Dude, that's Plutarch (400 years after Plato), and hey man, that's the same link you gave before! Is there really any reason to believe that Aristotle or Plutarch or any of these other dead white guys ever actually wrote any of this stuff? That was my point when I mentioned that I'd never seen any reference on it. Not that I'd never been linked to crystalinks to read some kind of claptrap.
From your link:

Plutarch mentions Saturnia or Ogygia about five days' sail to the west of Britain. He added that westwards from that island, there were the three islands of Cronus, to where proud and warlike men used to come from the continent beyond the islands, in order to offer sacrifice to the gods of the ocean.

Originally posted by NJE777
Druid mythology also makes reference to water gods…

The Celts worshipped water gods and believed water to be sacred. Like trees and water the Druids held some islands to be sacred too. Druidism

I know this is based on similarities...and nothing conclusive...but is anything absolute with respect to mythology?

Yes, there are many similarities between the mythologies of cultures all over the world, which, as you say, means nothing, really. I mean, water is important wherever you go. It's not hard to imagine water gods, fire gods, gods based on whatever your particular needs are, you know? If the needs are similar, the gods would be expected to be similar, at least on the face of it.

Your point about dating is correct, as far as it goes. But the discrepancies you keep talking about are not nearly enough to bring Atlantis into the Minoan time span, or even close to it. And while it's certain that dating Egyptian finds is a tricky business, I don't see how that applies to your Ogham ideas. I mean, we do pretty much know the extent of the lifespan of the Egyptian civilization, whether we can place this or that artifact into the proper temporal perspective within the known time span, well, that's another question. But it certainly doesn't stretch Egyptian civilization back further than the 3,000 to 3500 BC date we today accept.

Another thing you should probably be considering is the natural lifespan of a language. I mean, ancient languages that are not dead today remain alive only through the concerted efforts of individuals that have basically dedicated their very lives to the preservation of the ancient language. Who is preserving the Ogham? Without purposeful efforts to preserve, a language won't last more than a couple thousand years, in discernable form, anyway. Might as well try to connect ancient Greek to some Atlantean language. Better yet, Sumerian.

Anyway, try to find where Plutarch, Aristotle and the boys at your crystalinks quote actually said what is claimed on that page. If you can find it, it's better than even odds that reading the statement in context would reveal that these guys were no more referring to any "Atlantean-type" culture than they were to my ex mother-in-law!

Harte

[edit on 4/16/2006 by Harte]

Originally posted by NJE777

Julius Caesar described as Celtae. The word "Celtic" came originally from the Greeks who, around 600 B.C.,called the people who lived to the north of Greece Keltoi. We know also from references in both Greek and Roman texts that they inhabited a large area in Central Europe. Archaeologists do not believe that the Celts were one homogeneous people but were composed of many tribes speaking a similar language. How these different tribes came to speak a common language is not known, but these various peoples, referred to as Celtic, spoke a language which was a predecessor of modern-day Irish. Thus the word "Celtic" became a way of describing the people who spoke the Gaelic language. In Search of Ancient Ireland by Carmel McCaffrey and Leo Eaton. This book traces the history, archaeology, and legends of ancient Ireland from 9000 BC to 1167 AD when a Normans invaded Ireland

You know something seems strange about the above notations. What does this truly imply? I've taken the liberty to draw out the what has attracted my attention. See the BOLDS

Keltoi, means Hidden, in the Greek, so Ceasar was refering to these people in this region as the Hidden Celts. Why is this used? Is this to describe the area they lived in, or the name of the region, these people lived in.

For example, in Spain and Portugal, the Region is the Iberian Pennisula, named after the inhabitants, and not the region itself. I trust you get what I am suggesting here.

Also, the second indication expresses a wonder, that I think many maybe overlooking as simply a bunch of words alone. What people refered to as tribes, ever had the same language? That is the way of Tribes. They are unique within themselves. It is rediculous to say this, unless of course, they are implying something in a way that it is to be overlooked.

So, first we have these people Ceasar refers to as the Hidden Celts, and there is something they are hiding from. Interesting alone, but through in the "Enlightened", and their comments, and these Celts where made of various tribes, not closely affiliated, yet had the same language. And then the enlightened have this ability to through, "But no one knows why", and pass the point to get into another.

Personally, I like to know, how many tribes have had a common language, yet and where not directly tied to eachother?

To Start, I would seek tribes that are missing from today, but had a generally accepted historical past, and all spoke one language???

I think of the Historical documents many of the Faiths have. They generally confirm what ever Science is able to find, Many Biblical accounts have been proven. Likewise the Torah and Koran also have similiar references to peoples and where they lived.

Even other Ancient texts outside of the ones with religious themes, have expressed similiar references, that ultimately, are proven to be quite factual in an historical sense.

So what of lost or missing tribes from the Bible. If it is quite accurate in locating things from our past, what would make it less likely to be as accurate when discussing peoples. Assyrians where Assyrians, Persians where Persians, and so on. They lived in the land being descibed that the Bible has led Archaeologist to find.

The Koran speaks of a bunch of tribes in the middle east and they spoke one language. I wonder what happened to them? I think they where refered to as Israel

I am also certian the Torah mentioned these same people in their account of events. They ultimately become refered to as Ephriam when Israel was devided and the Southern Kingdoms made up of two tribes, and maintain their customs until they happened to get captured and taken to Babylon.

So what of this Ephriam? This Northern Kingdom, of what was once refered to as Israel?

In the Bible, there are also references to Israel deviding and the Kingdom being maintained thru our brother Judeah and the Levis. (This may cause contention amongst some, since many claim Benjamin also made up part of Judeah, but I do believe many if not more of Ben stayed part of the North. The Levi's made up the Rabbinical preisthood that maintained the temple, They would not dessert their duties to God.

But, what happened to these ten tribes of from the house of Jacob? Oh my goodness. Their Missing!

Ancient texts suggest they assimilated with the Assryians, They ventured over the Caucus Mountain and seemingly dissappear, or become hidden.

So could it be, this Celtic Laungage and the ties you are attempting to describe are a part of the Lost Tribe of Israel?? Ten Kingdoms that dissappeared. Seperate Tribes who did live appart, but spoke the same language, and spread throughout Europa to become the people they claimed to have been.

Evidence supports Holland is made up of the Tribe of Zebulan, which happens to mean, "a dwelling lifting water"' in the Chaldean much like what a windmill is. The Dane's ancient documents claim they are decentants of Dan. The Scotts and the Stone of Scone make a serious claim to being from Jacob, since they have his pillow, Jacob's Pillow. It's also refered to as the Corniation Stone.

We can be certain of one thing. The Northern Kingdom dissappeared prior to the Captivity in Babylon, so ten tribes that lived appart from each other, and all shared a common language, where Lost or in Hiding, sometime prior to 700 BC.

Thought I'd Throw this in for you consideration.

I like the Post and your efforts are excellent. I may not think it is all accurate, but it is the Gestalt that is important here. Many things considered, which truely are parts of one story.

Ciao

Shane

Originally posted by Harte
Dude,

Harte... I am NOT a 'dude'...well not since last time I checked!!
I have a name and it is Natalie or NJE....anything but 'dude' please!!!!

Your point about dating is correct, as far as it goes. But the discrepancies you keep talking about are not nearly enough to bring Atlantis into the Minoan time span, or even close to it.

I beg to differ, preliminary results from dendrochronology in Thera already bring the dates forward...how does this sit amongst the 'estimated dates' of that region? see excerpt below It may not be enough to bring ogham completely within Minoan epoch BUT I feel it is plausible the Celts were in close enough proximity to have knowledge of the Minoan civilisation, thus Atlantis. Perhaps??? it was incorporated into their language or mythology... the timeframe isn't (I feel) as distant as you protest...we are in the 21 century now and yet we have the knowledge of what happened last century, anors.

Numerous synchronisms have been drawn between Egypt and Mesopotamia, but many of these are based on unproved assumptions. Of those that are genuine, closer examination reveals that in many cases Mesopotamian chronology is actually dependent on Egyptian - and not the other way around. Egypt & Mesopotamia Chronology

Anyway, try to find where Plutarch, Aristotle and the boys at your crystalinks quote actually said what is claimed on that page. If you can find it, it's better than even odds that reading the statement in context would reveal that these guys were no more referring to any "Atlantean-type" culture than they were to my ex mother-in-law!

Oh I intend to do better than that... I am in the process of sourcing the original extract...soon as I find it, not if or when, I will post

oh and wanted to conclude with Russell Bertrand

The demand for certainty (to which many of these fringe ideas pander with some success) is what Bertrand Russell has referred to as a natural urge, but an "intellectual vice". Russell expands on the ways of science: what is at issue, he insists, is not so much "what opinions are held" but rather "how they are held". Ideas should be taken up only tentatively, "with a consciousness that new evidence may at any moment lead to their abandonment" (Russell, B. 1950. "Unpopular essays". Republished by Unwin Paperbacks, 1976).[url=http://www.driekopseiland.itgo.com/catalog.html][/ur]

cheers
Nat

edit x 2 format

[edit on 17-4-2006 by NJE777]

[edit on 17-4-2006 by NJE777]

oh Harte... I meant to say, I dont think Aristotle was referring to Atlantis...
Antilia, is in the West Indies..and where is the West Indies? In the Atlantic ocean.
I am still looking into that one...but feel Aristotle, the source you provided actually refers to an Island in the Atlantic...it is definitely all relative though

Originally posted by Shane
Keltoi, means Hidden, in the Greek, so Ceasar was refering to these people in this region as the Hidden Celts. Why is this used? Is this to describe the area they lived in, or the name of the region, these people lived in.

Hi Shane I think, after the info I have read the Keltoi or Celts were very secretive and their culture prohibited them from disclosing anything pertaining to them. I was very impressed that they relied on Greek 'for all other purposes'.

For example, in Spain and Portugal, the Region is the Iberian Pennisula, named after the inhabitants, and not the region itself. I trust you get what I am suggesting here.

I dont trust my perception of what you may or may not be saying here! lol
could you expand?.. I am not sure if my lack of surety stems from going to the races today and drinking too much and getting drenched? lol I think I am doing amazingly well for my big day out and all, yanno? lol

So, first we have these people Ceasar refers to as the Hidden Celts, and there is something they are hiding from. Interesting alone, but through in the "Enlightened", and their comments, and these Celts where made of various tribes, not closely affiliated, yet had the same language. And then the enlightened have this ability to through, "But no one knows why", and pass the point to get into another.

well, I don't think the Celts were hiding from anyone in particular, just very protective of their knowledge/culture...your above para reflects Indigenous trads, in that they had hundreds of small groups who interrelated with one another with no probs, the languages were different and yet, not enough to isolate them.

with respect to communicating...very involved issue with humble/basic beginnings. yanno, relying on gestures to overcome language differences to survive et cetera.

I think of the Historical documents many of the Faiths have. They generally confirm what ever Science is able to find, Many Biblical accounts have been proven. Likewise the Torah and Koran also have similiar references to peoples and where they lived.

Even other Ancient texts outside of the ones with religious themes, have expressed similiar references, that ultimately, are proven to be quite factual in an historical sense.

So what of lost or missing tribes from the Bible. If it is quite accurate in locating things from our past, what would make it less likely to be as accurate when discussing peoples. Assyrians where Assyrians, Persians where Persians, and so on. They lived in the land being descibed that the Bible has led Archaeologist to find.

You are correct here, insomuch that religious scriptures run more often than not parrallel with archaeology/science. I lmao cos I had just read some info that said more or less the same thing but I did not save it.

cheers
Nat

Originally posted by Shane
We can be certain of one thing. The Northern Kingdom dissappeared prior to the Captivity in Babylon, so ten tribes that lived appart from each other, and all shared a common language, where Lost or in Hiding, sometime prior to 700 BC.

oh wow, I didnt know that... the lost or hiding thing. This is a biblical account? hmmm I wonder what they were hiding from?

I am not up with theology, interesting point you have 'thrown in for consideration'

Where in the the Bible can I find this info?
What chapter et cetera

Originally posted by NJE777

Originally posted by Harte
Dude,

Harte... I am NOT a 'dude'...well not since last time I checked!!
I have a name and it is Natalie or NJE....anything but 'dude'

please!!!!

Pardon my vernacular usage!

Originally posted by NJE777

Your point about dating is correct, as far as it goes. But the discrepancies you keep talking about are not nearly enough to bring Atlantis into the Minoan time span, or even close to it.

I beg to differ, preliminary results from dendrochronology in Thera already bring the dates forward...how does this sit amongst the 'estimated dates' of that region? It may not be enough to bring ogham completely within Minoan epoch BUT I feel it is plausible the Celts were in close enough proximity to have knowledge of the Minoan civilisation, thus Atlantis. Perhaps??? it was incorporated into their language or mythology... the timeframe isn't (I feel) as distant as you protest...we are in the 21 century now and yet we have the knowledge of what happened last century, anors.

If you mean Minoan, maybe you should just say Minoan. The Minoans don't fit into Plato's Atlantean timeframe (9,000 years before Plato!) As I said in the portion of my post that you quoted. Some consider that the Minoans, being a "lost civilization" at the time of Plato, might have been a basis for some of what Plato said about Atlantis in his fictional account. It could be true, I suppose, but only in the scenario of Plato's account being fictional. After all, while the Minoans may superficially resemble parts of Plato's description of Atlantis, they certainly don't fitall of it. The location and size are wrong, just for starters. Also, there is the timeframe problem, and let's not forget that the Atlanteans were defeated by the Athenians.

Regarding this timeframe problem, many suggest that Solon misinterpreted what he (supposedly) heard from the Egyptian priests about Atlantis. I don't buy that at all, mainly because if you bring Atlantis forward into, say, 1000 years before Plato (usually they say 900 years,) there are just too many records still around from that era, none of which mention Atlantis, nor is there any mention of any nation similar to Atlantis regarding status, power, riches, trade, etc.

Originally posted by NJE777

Anyway, try to find where Plutarch, Aristotle and the boys at your crystalinks quote actually said what is claimed on that page. If you can find it, it's better than even odds that reading the statement in context would reveal that these guys were no more referring to any "Atlantean-type" culture than they were to my ex mother-in-law!

Oh I intend to do better than that...

I am in the process of sourcing the original extract...soon as I find it, not if or when, I will post

cheers
Nat

Great! This ought to be interesting.

Harte

Hello Nat. Nice to get something real to associate to.

Well, what is offered is an observation. Something that is not clearly defined anywhere in specific, and some may refer to British Israelism, although that is not quite accurate.

The Northern Kingdoms of Israel, turned their backs on God and worshipped Baal, in God's stead. They created Idols and worshiped these contrary to The Law of God. Did they go into hiding in an attempt to flee God's wrath? Possible.

2 Kings covers much of the Situation that arose in the United Israel and explains how it became devided, around Chapter 10 and on.

According to Assyrian records, Sargon conquered the City of Samaria, which became the Capital of the Northern Kingdom, in 721 BC, and the inhabitants of the land where taken to Assyria and assimilated in Media, which is today northern Iraq and Iran. It is curious, that the Assyrian Chronicles note only a small number was taken.

What happened to the rest? Had they fled at another time

Lets look at some references

en.wikisource.org...

The Start of the Second Paragraph

"Most Holy Father and Lord, we know from the deeds of the ancients and we read from books -- because among the other great nations of course, our nation of Scots has been described in many publications -- that crossing from Greater Scythia, via the Tyrhennian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and living in Spain among the fiercest tribes for many years, it could be conquered by no one anywhere, no matter how barbarous the tribes. Afterwards, coming from there, one thousand two hundred years from the Israelite people's crossing of the Red Sea, to its home in the west, which it now holds"

Here in the Scot's records, we see a historical remark, which implies they have come from Israel. They travel from the Media region and stayed in Spain for some time, until they depart from Spain 1200 years after Moses lead Israel from Egypt. Elsewhere in this text they give an account of the King Line of 113 Kings, and as I noted previously they still have the Stone of Scone. Which the Brit's gave back in the Mid 90's

en.wikipedia.org...

For your reference.

As for say the Irish, I offer this

thescotsman.scotsman.com.../

"Historians have long believed the British Isles were invaded by Iron Age Celts from central Europe in about 500 BC. But geneticists at Dublin’s Trinity College now claim the Scots and Irish have as much, if not more, in common with the people of north-western Spain."

I seem to like second paragraphs. Taken from the Scotsman, We see a link again to Spain and but check the Dates.

"But Dr Bradley said that it was possible migrants moved from the Iberian peninsula as far back as 6,000 years ago and up until 3,000 years ago."

This is remarkable. 4000 BC as a possible date for the start of Celtic habitation on the Emerald Isle.

So lets head to the Iberian Pennisula.

en.wikipedia.org...

Prehistory of the Iberian Peninsula
The indigenous peoples of the Iberian peninsula, consisting of a number of separate tribes, are given the generic name of Iberians. This may have included the Basques, as one of the pre-Celtic people. The most important culture of this period is that of the city of Tartessos. Beginning in the 8th century BC, Celtic tribes entered the Iberian peninsula through the Pyrenees and settled throughout the peninsula, becoming the Celtiberians

So lets look east.

We just depart the Iberian Pennisula and what can we find.

Well, we can find a map to review of interest.

en.wikipedia.org...:Caucasus03.png

Have you looked at this map? Well, we have Iberia in the midsts of the Caucusian Mountians. Is that comment I made about the Iberian Pennisula previously making sense? Recall the Scythia reference from the Scots, and you are in the right area.

So, again, I am only offering you some things to consider.

But from this, we can see it is actually possible that Celts had a knowledge of Atllantis, since they are being dated back to that time frame.

And here, we find another things is clear. The Celtic language has Ancient origins to predate the Great Flood, and could also coincide with Atlantis in that Timeframe.

The Ogham, I can't help with yet, but I am still looking.

Have a good day Nat, and I hope this can be of use.

Ciao

Shane

[edit on 17-4-2006 by Shane]

wow... I am so happy

many years ago I lent out some books to a friend and tonight she came over and returned them...he he I forgot I owned some of them as it has been so long. Anyway...I am reading one of my books and can't believe I forgot I had this info... he he he

It is so amazing when you are looking for info and it just comes along...oh the Universe is great and even better when its right under your nose or under your friend's nose...hmm think its time to call some of my other friends and have an amnesty for the recall of all my books

This is an excerpt from a book by Vera Stanley Alder, The Finding Of The Third Eye, (1938) pp 158-165, Rider & Co, London

As per copyright, this is less than 10% of the book
ISBN 0-87728-056-8