Ancient Visitors to the Americas

From your source

Furthermore, it cannot be ruled out that the coca plant was possibly imported to Africa before Columbus. Although trade relations between the New World and Africa are not known, the existence of links between the continents cannot be rejected.

Possibly ancient people navigated South American rivers to the Atlantic, crossed the ocean and reached the African continent. Recently a pre-Colombian, earthen Roman head was found in Central America. Recent investigations of a mummy found in Florida, aged 7,000 years, demonstrated identical genotype with those of Asiatic race, but not with those of native Americans (S. Pääbo "Ancient DNA" Scientific American, November 1993: 64). These facts are possibly also evidence for trans-Atlantic relations.

The discovery of coc aine in Egyptian mummies is however not so easy to account for as no direct evidence unequivocally supports any particular contention. Although it is possible that experimental error or modern fake mummies could account for these results both of these explanations are highly unlikely. The authenticity of the mummies has been confirmed by independent experts, the methods employed by Balabanova are reliable and are also used by forensic departments around the world. In addition Balabanova's results were confirmed by GC/MS at four different laboratories.

There is sufficient evidence therefore to indicate that the ancient Egyptians could have obtained plants, spices or timber from locations as far afield as India, Afghanistan and the coasts of Africa.

Are there any plant sources of THC known to have been available in Peru between 200 and 1500AD?
WP: We have not investigated this question.
Do these results support an established trans-Atlantic trading route between Egypt and South America that predates Columbus (1492AD)?
WP: No, this conclusion cannot be made from the Ulm findings.
Could they indicate the possibility of a distant trading route across the Pacific between South America, Asia and Africa?
WP: No, this conclusion cannot be made from the Ulm findings.
Do you favour any particular interpretation of your results?
WP: As the Ulm findings are gained from a few specimens of a few sites in the huge world without other contemporary background information I don’t dare to interpret them in any particular cultural context.

Inconclusive. " I don’t dare to interpret them in any particular cultural context".

Though i dont personally favor the Egyptians having trade routes established with the New World, i do think thats it is entirely possible that either the Phoenicians, Romans, or groups from Oceania or Southeast Asia did have Trans-oceanic pre-columbian contact with the New World.

Just to throw in a tangent here, I recently read a fascinating book..'1421: The Year China Discovered The World' of how a huge Imperial Chinese fleet not only visited and mapped the North American and Greenland coasts nearly a century before Columbus' discovery, but also circumnavigated the globe before Magellan. The maps that were produced from these expeditions were the basis of the charts used by both Magellan and Columbus many years later.



[edit on 11-2-2007 by citizen smith]

mojo4sale
Though i dont personally favor the Egyptians having trade routes established with the New World, i do think thats it is entirely possible that either the Phoenicians, Romans, or groups from Oceania or Southeast Asia did have Trans-oceanic pre-columbian contact with the New World.

personally I would think it far more likely that indigenous peoples from south america made it to Egypt than indigenous peoples from Egypt made it to south america
having said that the period that the mummies date from is exactly the same time that the phoenecians were at the height of their power
if any group had the capability to make such a trip it was them

citizen smith
The maps that were produced from these expeditions were the basis of the charts used by both Magellan and Columbus many years later.

don't get me started Wolfie

I've heard about this too. The Chinese build huge vessels, and if I remember right their are chronicles describing them at the Portuguese coast.

Eventually after they had recorded the world, the Emperor decided that the world had nothing of interest to offer the Chinese, and he ordered the whole fleet burned.

Probably from Discovery I have it, but please do get started Murduk.

I remember something similar too khunmoon but i think that the maps being touted were said to be frauds, i may be wrong, i'll try to find some links.

Here ya go.
Article from February 2006, cant find anything to suggest wether the map has been tested scientifically

Geoff Wade, Senior Research Fellow at the University of Singapore's Asia Research Institute, echoed her sentiment. "The map is an 18th-century copy of a European map, as evidenced by the two hemispheres depicted, the continents shown and the non-maritime detailed [sic] depicted," he wrote recently to a group of maritime scholars.

In the other camp, Menzies is supporting Liu and the 1418 map with fervor. His key reasoning, forwarded by email from a member of his staff, is that "every continent, ocean, land, island, river shown on the 1418 map also appears on other Chinese maps of the same date or earlier. There is nothing new on the 1418 map—it simply combines everything on one sheet of paper," he said.

Says here that its being dated but i cant find the results of the tests

The map, which is being dated to check it was made in 1763, faces a lot of scepticism from experts.

Even if its not a fake i dont believe they would have been the first anyway.

edit to fix link twice!!!!!
[edit on 11/2/07 by mojo4sale]

[edit on 11/2/07 by mojo4sale]

While there may be debate to the authenticity of the Vinland and Piri Reis maps, what did catch my attention was Menzies' theory of how you could sail such vast distances betwen the African and American continents using the oceanic currents as conveyors. It's not so much who discovered where first, but that it demonstrated as being possible to cross such vast ocean distances

Originally posted by citizen smith
you could sail such vast distances betwen the African and American continents using the oceanic currents as conveyors.

Exactly what Heyerdale found to be true.

Still waiting for marduk to address the similarities between hebrew and phoenician language. More than half the characters are the same but Hebrew was obviously crafted by a master linguist in both shape and form. Personally I believe that creative mind to be the Pharoah Akenaten, who took his Hyksos bloodline and crafted the modern day "Israelite Nation" complete with a beautiful script (Hebrew) which was easily learned by everyone in the area. Yes, Moses was Akenaten and this is obvious from how the nation of Israel simply pops up from out of nowhere. The secret is this: When you have a great leader, it is the beginning of your nation. Once Moses/Akenaten stopped being an Egyptian, Israel came on the scene because Akenaten walked into Goshen and collected his people.

The founder of Scotland was an Egyptian princess called Scota. How did she get there marduk? Did she walk?

Even if you wish to cling to the idea that egyptians were terrible mariners, what about the historical character Gathelos who was greek? Certainly there were great seafarers in the med at that time and yes, they did get to Ireland and yes, they did go into the Atlantic.

What you refuse to acknowledge is that they may have made it to the Americas, and you are doing this in the face of established, proven fact that it is possible.


[edit on 11-2-2007 by smallpeeps]

Frank Joseph: "I haven't seen what they found down there. It sounds like if it looks Greek, but isn't Greek, that might be that it's Etruscan. I'm not saying the site underwater is an Etruscan site. That's probably unlikely. The Etruscans did not build things that look like Teotihuacan, that's for sure! But the Etruscans, where did they get their written language? It's possible that what we're looking at in Etruscan is a variation of the Atlantean language. We don't know what the Atlantean written language looks like. But it appears to be the precursor, not just of Greek, but other written languages in other parts of the world. So, it's possible that if they look to Etruscan, they might be able to see some similarities. That's not much help though. Even if they identify it as Etruscan, they won't be able to read it because the Etruscan written language as not yet been deciphered. They've gotten some names off it and little snatches of things, but the language itself is really bizarre because it is a Greek type written language, but the language itself is more like Turkish or something. It's really very perplexing.

The Etruscans are far more directly connected to Atlantis because Plato in his discussion of Atlantis mentions the Etruscans specifically as being an outpost of Atlantis, that the Atlanteans came to western Italy and set up their estate there and sort of inter-married with the people and created what became known as the Etruscans.

Etruscan glyphs

How would an ancient Minoan symbol end up a half mile down amid other apparent megalithic structures off the western tip of Cuba?

Who are the sea people?
What Minoan symbols doing in Cuba?
What are these etruscan glyphs?
... in America ...

Another ‘Stonehenge’ discovered in Amazon

While the Incas, Mayans and Aztecs built large cities and huge rock structures, pre-Columbian Amazon societies built smaller settlements of wood and clay that quickly deteriorated in the hot, humid Amazon climate, disappearing centuries ago, archaeologists say

How come?
The indigenous people never build any of these megalithic structures... others were involved...

Originally posted by Dragonlike
Another ‘Stonehenge’ discovered in Amazon

While the Incas, Mayans and Aztecs built large cities and huge rock structures, pre-Columbian Amazon societies built smaller settlements of wood and clay that quickly deteriorated in the hot, humid Amazon climate, disappearing centuries ago, archaeologists say

How come?
The indigenous people never build any of these megalithic structures... others were involved...

There are even huge Stonehenge-like structures right here in Pennsylvania.
And, nobody has any idea where they came from.

Still waiting for marduk to address the similarities between hebrew and phoenician language. More than half the characters are the same but Hebrew was obviously crafted by a master linguist in both shape and form

errr
you do realise that the phoenecians came from canaan

The Phoenician alphabet is a continuation of the Proto-Canaanite alphabet, by convention taken to begin with a cut-off date of 1050 BC. It was used by the Phoenicians to write Phoenician, a Northern Semitic language. Modern alphabets thought to have descended from Phoenician include Arabic, Greek, Latin (via the Old Italic alphabet), Cyrillic (via the Greek alphabet), Tifinagh (via the Lybian alphabet) and Hebrew (via Aramaic).

en.wikipedia.org...

Yes, Moses was Akenaten and this is obvious from how the nation of Israel simply pops up from out of nowhere

actually Moses is a fictional character
he only appears in one book

and its not a history book
its a religious text with an agenda

The founder of Scotland was an Egyptian princess called Scota. How did she get there marduk? Did she walk?

that is a claim made in one book written in the 17th century
the actual derivation of the word scot is as follows

"Scot, with its variants Scotch, Scottish, etc., may have been an Irish term of scorn (Scuit, pronounced #e); its ulterior origin is unknown." [Shipley]

this Egyptian princess can't have been very well thought of eh
even if you accept the pseudohistoric claim that scot is named after scotia then she still didn't arrive on an egyptian ship
she came with the milesians
they're not spanish
theyre from Iberia
and funnily enough the dna evidence does support that claim
do you actually know anything about real history or are you writing a book ?

as for Gathelos
I've never heard of him
do you have a credible link that discusses his exploits
anything that doesn't claim he founded the anasazi which you've written before would be good because I could really make you look stupid if you try to claim that one here
I've got friends at the hopi cultural preservation office who would laugh out loud at that claim as they claim they are the descendants of the anasazi who you think have died out for some reason. they are actually descended from Mesoamerican indians who came north, as their dna and their tribal legends attest

What you refuse to acknowledge is that they may have made it to the Americas, and you are doing this in the face of established, proven fact that it is possible.

possible doesn't equal evidence
its possible for me to rob the local bank but it doesn't prove that I have

and anyway
you'll never take me alive copper


[edit on 12-2-2007 by Marduk]

originally posted by smallpeepsproven fact that it is possible.

Its more than possible, there is in fact decisive evidence according to the information contained in this paper.



Paper by John L. Sorenson and Carl L. Johannessen detailing their evidence for pre-columbian trans oceanic migration of Flora and Fauna. I've already posted this link once but it does contain evidence of trans oceanic voyages as far back as the 7th millenium bc, so it is worth posting again.

The only plausible explanation for these findings is that a considerable number of transoceanic voyages in both directions across both major oceans were completed between the 7th millennium BC and the European age of discovery. Our growing knowledge of early maritime technology and its accomplishments gives us confidence that vessels and nautical skills capable of these long-distance travels were developed by the times indicated. These voyages put a new complexion on the extensive Old World/New World cultural parallels that have long been controversial.

summary of how the conclusions were reached and evidence and references provided

It is obvious that the presentation above required weighing the value of the data on the various species as evidence for transoceanic voyaging. We tried to utilize a somewhat objective framework for our evaluation by reverting to the procedure familiar to us as professors who have to grade student papers. That is, we laid out a scheme of factors we thought significant in arriving at the worth of information on each species. We then agreed on a score reflecting how convincing each element of information is. Definitive archaeological work demonstrating the appearance of the species in the hemisphere where it did not originate was assigned a high score. Other scores were given if a pre-Columbian historical document mentioned the (imported) species; if a lexical source assured us that the species name was known anciently; if pre-Columbian art clearly represented the species in the hemisphere where it did not originate; etc. We then added together those factorial scores to yield an overall rating. Those species which earned grades of A, A minus, B plus, or B, we considered to have been supported by 'decisive' evidence; we have listed them in Table 1. Tables 2 and 3 list species deemed to rate less than 'decisively evidenced.' We followed a similar procedure in giving evidential values as shown in Tables 4 through 7.

Decisive evidence.

Its more than possible, there is in fact decisive evidence according to the information contained in this paper.

thats not even admissable as it was written by a mormon religious group whos whole faith relies on the fact that someone from the old world made it to the new in time for Joseph smith to find the holy book written on sheets of metal that only he could read that they left behind expressly for that purpose
BYU as referenced by your link if you haven't already realised it is brigham young university

thats Brigham Young aka the american moses

en.wikipedia.org...

While the concept of diffusion is well accepted in general, conjectures about the existence or the extent of diffusion in some specific contexts have been hotly disputed.

An example of such disputes is the proposal by Thor Heyerdahl that similarities between the culture of Polynesia and the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Andes are due to diffusion from the latter to the former — a theory that currently has few supporters among professional anthropologists.

Attempts to explain similarities between two cultures by diffusion are often criticized for being ethnocentric, since they imply that the supposedly "receptors" would not be capable of innovation. In fact, some authors made such claims explicitly — for example, to argue for pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact as the "only possible explanation" for the origin of the great civilizations in the Andes and of Central America.

Those disputed are fueled in part by the overuse of cultural diffusion, starting in the late 19th century, as a blanket explanation for all similarities between widely dispersed cultures. The most famous proponent of this theory was William Graham Sumner, who argued that civilization first formed in Ancient Egypt and then diffused to other places.

Diffusion theories also suffer from being inherently speculative and hard to prove or disprove; especially for relatively simple cultural items like "pyramid-shaped buildings", "solar deity", "row of standing stones", or "animal paintings in caves". After all, the act of diffusion proper is a purely mental (or at most verbal) phenomenon, that leaves no archaeological trace. Therefore, diffusion can be deduced with some certainty only when the similarities involve a relatively complex and partly arbitrary collection of items — such as a writing system, a complex myth, or a pantheon of several gods.

Another criticism that has been leveled at many diffusion proposals is the failure to explain why certain items were not diffused. For example, attempts to "explain" the New World civilizations by diffusion from Europe or Egypt should explain why basic concepts like wheeled vehicles or the potter's wheel did not cross the ocean, while writing and stone pyramids did.

en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Marduk]

Originally posted by Marduk
For example, attempts to "explain" the New World civilizations by diffusion from Europe or Egypt should explain why basic concepts like wheeled vehicles or the potter's wheel did not cross the ocean, while writing and stone pyramids did.

Weak argument. Now you will appeal to absurdity? Joseph Smith may have been a fraud, but I do not believe so. Also do I believe that the LDS church has proof of Smith's tablets being from Amarna.

Anyway, as to the quote above, It is possible that technology would unstabilize a native group, and it is also possible that the visitng group would refrain from providing tech like wheels and such because they realized this.

Anyway, as to the quote above, It is possible that technology would unstabilize a native group, and it is also possible that the visitng group would refrain from providing tech like wheels and such because they realized this.

yeah sure
if they were from the federation and believed in the prime directive
history is full of natives being exploited by newcomers
and really
if you believe the mormon faith is real then you should join them
because otherwise you're in the wrong religion
so how much of it do you believe
do you believe that the angel Moroni was sent by God and appeared before Joseph Smith and told him where to find the book fo Mormon which only Jospeph Smith could read ?
images.southparkstudios.com...

Also do I believe that the LDS church has proof of Smith's tablets being from Amarna.

Its funny that they don't mention Armana anywhere then isn't it
in fact that would go against their religious beliefs

According to Latter-day Saint theology, the term Mormon also refers to a prophet who lived in the Americas in the 4th century A.D. He was called by God to abridge and compile the records of his people and their dealings with God into a single book. This book is now known as the Book of Mormon. After Mormon's death, his son Moroni witnessed the complete destruction of his people and buried the record compiled by his father in a hill in what is now upstate New York, the hill Comorah. This same Moroni, more than 1400 years later, was sent by God as a messenger to Smith who went to the place where the record was buried, and with a great deal of help from God, Smith translated the record into English.

so your belief seems to be based on your imagination
what do you actually believe smallpeeps
which religion is the correct one iyo ?

here is a paper written by a professor of mesoamerican studies about diffusion entitled "Plant Evidence for Contact Between Africa and the New World"
www.hallofmaat.com...

Conclusion

Both a detailed survey of the particular plants claimed to have diffused to the New world from Africa, and general considerations such as priority in plant domestication and the lack of a proven method of transport in the relevant time period, clearly show that claims of human mediated plant diffusion from Africa to the New World are unfounded.

Originally posted by Marduk
if you believe the mormon faith is real then you should join them
because otherwise you're in the wrong religion
so how much of it do you believe
do you believe that the angel Moroni was sent by God and appeared before Joseph Smith and told him where to find the book fo Mormon which only Jospeph Smith could read ?

What I believe comes from a place of much more certainty than what I can tell here. I am not a Mormon, but I threw some chicken bones in a dish and was told certain things. Attempts to turn this into an ad-hominem arguement will fail. Go after the ball, not the man, remember?

But yeah, I can accept that Christianity needed to be corrected away from the female-hating catholics. So what? Is this on topic? Yes, I am willing to believe that God would allow a church to be built in the New World (America) which was more correctly family centered than the churches which existed at the time. But I have faith in God to correct the evils of the Catholics and their pontiff. Do you?

so your belief seems to be based on your imagination
what do you actually believe smallpeeps
which religion is the correct one iyo ?

Nobody would even have known about Amarna if it hadn't been for a planned revelation in this century. It's cute how easily you skim over that fact. I don't think the Mormons know half of what really went on in the past centuries of America, and yes I think early leaders made some stuff up (as any other religion does).

The correct religon is the one to come and no, it won't be Mormonism but it will be connected to that church. Now quid pro quo, tell me your answer to the same question? Do you have faith in a religion and if so, which one and why? (really I am indulging you because you are going off topic, but it's fun for me). I want you to realize something tho: Someone as wise as Akenaten would be very careful to hide actual truth from persons like yourself who are not people of faith anyway. The idea of a prophet dictating a book from God requires faith and free will to believe. Hiding secrets from dolts is the first thing smart leaders learn.

Imagination is good tho', and I suggest you try to imagine that the motives of the writers of all holy books are both good and evil, and that good and evil appear in all holy books and the stories from whence they came.

As for the "prime directive", it would be obvious to a person of faith that if God said to reveal certain things and not others, then those persons would make it so. In a world where flying saucers are buzzing around everywhere, you find it inconcievable that God might protect a ship or two across the Atlantic? That he might give them a few instructions about how to behave toward the natives? American native populations are rife with stories of visitors from other places. Any American indian will tell you that the anazstazi for example, were not native people to America. Also did they introduce the simple technology of the pit house which suddenly springs up in that area of America for no reason. So yes there was simple technology which entered America but nothing which would interfere with the natives.

But why are you running away from the questions I asked earlier? You're taking the argument to me, but it makes your argument weaker, because who am I? Nobody. Am I a Mormon? No. But I do sometimes connect with dead spirits and they guide me in finding truth.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by smallpeeps]

1.John L. Sorenson is emeritus professor of anthropology at Brigham Young University, where he founded work in that discipline in the 1950s. He was attracted from the physical sciences (he holds an M.S. degree from the California Institute of Technology) to anthropology by way of archaeology, but after beginning study for the Ph.D. at UCLA, his focus shifted to sociocultural anthropology with emphasis on its applications to problems of modern society.
After completing the Ph. D. degree, he went to BYU. In 1964–1969 he went as head social scientist to General Research Corp., a Santa Barbara, CA, think tank. In 1969, he founded Bonneville Research as a subsidiary of GRC, in Provo, UT, before returning to the BYU faculty in 1971. He served as chair of the department of anthropology for eight years before retiring in 1986. Since then, he has returned to his early interests in Mesoamerican archaeology and transoceanic contacts, seeking to engender in those studies some of the rigor he learned from doing 'hard science.'
2. Carl L. Johannessen is emeritus professor of biogeography in the Department of Geography at the University of Oregon at Eugene. He taught at that university from 1959 to 1994. His M.A. in zoology and Ph.D. in geography came from the University of California at Berkeley.
He studied the distribution of human-modified wild vegetation in Latin America first, but after a decade, the domestication process became his focus. That work led to a search for how human-caused modifications in flora and fauna were accomplished and what were the resultant distributions. By the 1980s, his interest had come to center on evidence for the movement of organisms by voyagers across the oceans before Columbus.
He has made many research trips to India, China, Europe, the Middle East, Polynesia, and Latin America in pursuit of evidence in the literature and in the field of the distribution of plants (domesticates and weeds) and animals transferred long distances by humans. Most recently, he has expanded that topic to include the entire process of transoceanic diffusion in human history.

John L. Sorenson may very well have been at BYU, that doesnt negate the fact that both these gentlemen are qualified to research and offer there conclusions. In fact they cite some of the same research that you linked to in a previous post.

This link that you provided marduk also cites the work of Balabanova as does the link i provided.

Balabanova, Parsche, and Pirsig 1992b. Residues from hashish and cannabis were identified chemically in cranial hair of pre-Columbian Peruvian mummies.
Parsche, Balabanova, and Pirsig 1993, 503. They analyzed hair, skin, muscle, brain, teeth, and bones from 72 Peruvian (as well as11 Egyptian ) mummies and found chemical residues of coc aine, nicotine, and hashish and their metabolites in both sets of mummies (16 of the Peruvian corpses revealed coc aine; 26 had tobacco traces; and 20 showed hashish).

Balabanova et al. 1992a, 358. Nine Egyptian mummies, dated from approximately 1070 BC to AD 395 were examined by radioimmuno-assay and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. Cocaine and hashish were found in all nine, and nicotine from tobacco in eight mummies in hair, soft tissue, and bones.
Balabanova et al. 1992b. Showed hashish along with coc aine and nicotine in Peruvian mummies. Balabanova, Boyuan Wei, and Krámer (1995, 68) say that 1992b demonstrated "the presence of coc aine, nicotine, and hashish in hair and soft tissue of pre-Columbian mummies," so this was not an inadvertent statement.
Balabavanova, Boyuan Wei, and M. Krámer 1995, 74. More than 60 kinds of wild tobacco plant forms are known (in the world). It "seems possible" that in past centuries nicotine was used in medicine. Or nicotine may have entered the picture as a secondary alkaloid in some other plants. Thus, e.g., in Withania somnifera, family nightshade, in the levels (sic) of Prunus ceresus, family Rosaceae, in the Narcisse, family amaryllidaceae, etc. Use of these plants [not demonstrated, of course] "may" be followed by accumulation of nicotine in the body. Also, possibly imported. E.g., Withania somnifera is the best-known drug in ancient India. "In conclusion, our results showed the presence of nicotine in ancient population (sic) of southern China, and consequently, the presence and use of the alkaloid, as principal or secondary alkaloid in native Chinese or imported plants."

These two gentlemen also seem to be eminantly qualified to offer their conclusions from research.

Romeo H. Hristov

University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain; Ph.D. (ABD) in Archaeology/Prehistory and Ancient History, 1996-99
National School/Institute of Anthropology and History, Mexico City, Mexico; B.A./M.A. in Mesoamerican Archaeology 1990-96, with honors; scholarship from National Council of Science and Technology of Mexico (CONACyT), 1995-96
University "Saint Clement of Ohrid", Sofia, Bulgaria; 5 semesters B.A./M.A in Ancient History/Archaeology, 1988-1990

Santiago Genovés T

Cambrige University, England, Ph.D., 1956
School of Anthropology, Mexico City, B.A., 1950-1953
School of Medicine, Mexico City, 1944-1947

Originally posted by Marduk
actually Moses is a fictional character
he only appears in one book

and its not a history book
its a religious text with an agenda

I know you think this, but it doesn't make it so. People were smarter in the past than you give them credit for. The name Mose is an egyptian name meaning "water" or "born of". The person who wrote Genesis called himself Moses. Just out of curiosity, where do you think the book of Genesis came from? Also where do you think Hebrew came from? All of a sudden these nomads got it together and created the most artistic script ever? No, Hebrew was obviously created by someone with great artistic ability. It represents a quantum leap in language which you'd have us believe.... What? Just occurred to some sheepherder?

that is a claim made in one book written in the 17th century
the actual derivation of the word scot is as follows

Yeah right. Why not walk upland a bit and talk to actual Scots people? Why should I educate you when omnipotent certainty is your bedfellow?

this Egyptian princess can't have been very well thought of eh
even if you accept the pseudohistoric claim that scot is named after scotia then she still didn't arrive on an egyptian ship
she came with the milesians

Right, and who were they? Milesian artifacts have been found in Goshen which date to 1300bc showing cross-culture contact. Read more, and know more.

as for Gathelos
I've never heard of him

He is a historical character who assisted a Pharaoh miltarily at the time of the exodus and married that Pharaoh's eldest daughter. I'm surprised that you call yourself an expert (who lives in Europe?) and you don't know about this very common legend?

members.aol.com...

If a Milesian marries an egyptian, do you think he might be able to impart seafaring knowledge to those egyptians or perhaps give them a captain or two?

do you have a credible link that discusses his exploits
anything that doesn't claim he founded the anasazi which you've written before would be good because I could really make you look stupid if you try to claim that one here

I never said Gathelos founded the anasazi. Please do not misrepresent my words out of spite or ignorance. I said sailing the Atlantic was possible at that time and that it did happen. You are trying to prove something impossible when it has already been proven possible.

I've got friends at the hopi cultural preservation office who would laugh out loud at that claim as they claim they are the descendants of the anasazi who you think have died out for some reason. they are actually descended from Mesoamerican indians who came north, as their dna and their tribal legends attest

I'd like to call these friends and talk to them. Do you have contact info for them? Thanks.


[edit on 13-2-2007 by smallpeeps]

I know you think this, but it doesn't make it so. People were smarter in the past than you give them credit for. The name Mose is an egyptian name meaning "water" or "born of". The person who wrote Genesis called himself Moses.

actually
the name moses doesn't mean water at all

"Most scholars see in it the Hebraization of Egyptian mes, mesu 'child, son,' which is often used in theophorous names. According to this derivation the words of Pharaoh's daughter in Ex. 2:10, 'For out of the water I drew him' are not the explanation of the Hebrew name Mosheh, but express the idea that the Egyptian name given by Pharaoh's daughter resembles in sound, and therefore, reminds us of, the Hebrew verb mashah 'he drew out,' which is suggestive of the words spoken by Pharaoh's daughter." [Dr. Ernest Klein, "A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the English Language"]

it means son of in egyptian
should you actually bother to check the pharoahs of the time you will find that they all have this surname
hence
Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose I, Thutmose II, Thutmose III, Thutmose IV.
So you have a bit of an oddity. someone who is a biblical patriarch named with an egyptian name which on its own unattached to a forename doesnt mean anything. This is like yuou claim smarter than I give them credit for is it ?. naming a fictional character after a supposed egyptian and then getting it wrong., this is just the same as when they chose the name eden to name the garden of the lord when in fact Eden is a mesopotamian word that loosely translates to "garden". so they called it the garden of garden. this is another example of the Hebrews being cleverer than I give them credit for. hehe

Just out of curiosity, where do you think the book of Genesis came from?

I know exactly where the Book of Genesis came from and no before you start preaching it wasn't God at all
if you want I will happily prove the origins of the book of genesis with credible links,
but it would cost you your faith so think long and hard before you ask for the details

All of a sudden these nomads got it together and created the most artistic script ever?

clearly in that case you know very little about the development of languages

PITTSBURGH (AP) -- Two lines of an alphabet have been found inscribed in a stone in Israel, offering what some scholars say is the most solid evidence yet that the ancient Israelites were literate as early as the 10th century B.C.

www.livescience.com...
see hebrew didn't exist until well after the 10th century
by that time it was 100% normal and other languages were far more developed than it
you seem to think that Hebrew is a language in its own right, in fact it is a northwest semitic dialect. this means that it is not special at all
West semitic langauges consist of the clearly defined sub-groups: Ethiopic, South Arabian, Arabic and Northwest Semitic (this including Hebrew,) Aramaic and Ugaritic).
most of these other examples pre date Hebrew and it actually developed from them. so hardly the most artistic script ever
en.wikipedia.org...

It represents a quantum leap in language which you'd have us believe.... What? Just occurred to some sheepherder?

well now that I've explained how ludicrous this statement is you won't need to ever have to claim it again will you

Yeah right. Why not walk upland a bit and talk to actual Scots people? Why should I educate you when omnipotent certainty is your bedfellow?

Being English with scots ancestry i feel no need to do this
I actually have lots of scottish friends which is why I know their history
I'd love to know where you are from
I'm betting its not scotland or ireland

though you seem to think that you represent them
care to tell us all just what connection you have to the scottish people ?
the book that contains the tale of Scotia isn't even Scottish
its irish
its called the Lebor Gabála Érenn and wasn't written by Irish people either but was compiled by Christian monks. Most nationals regard it as an attempt by an unwanted religion to steal their heritage
but of course you know that right because you seem to think you're an expert on it

Right, and who were they? Milesian artifacts have been found in Goshen which date to 1300bc showing cross-culture contact. Read more, and know more.

this is very funny
you seem to think it is unusual for a group of people who come from anatolia to not be trading with the country next door to them
I guess you would be surprised to know that roadsigns in wales are written in welsh and english
astounding eh
I think I know whereyou went wrong there though
you are clearly confusing the milesians of Mileta with the milesians of Iberia
they are two seperate groups and not connected in any way whatever

He is a historical character who assisted a Pharaoh miltarily at the time of the exodus and married that Pharaoh's eldest daughter.

no that is Gaythelos
you asked

what about the historical character Gathelos who was greek?

if you can't even spell his name correctly you can hardly claim to know all about him can you
and once again the story which contains the character Gaythelos os from the Lebor Gabála Érenn which is about as historically accurate as the bible which it is based on

I'd like to call these friends and talk to them. Do you have contact info for them? Thanks.

www.nau.edu...
this is quite typical of someone who makes claims about the Hopi
they are unaware that the hopi have their own website and consistently send out information about their heritage to anyone who would want to listen
but still ridiculous claims are amde for them about Aliens and an egyptian heritage which they themselves have never claimed at all
so I'd love to know how you think their heritage is somehow related to that of Egypt when their blood groups consist of only native dna (mtdna a,b,c,d)and the egyptians is a mixture of sub saharan african and levantine

Like I said smallpeep you don't know anything at all about real history
your inability to provide any links to back your claims which in most cases are clearly ludicrous and based on your faith will have you looking uneducated and uninformed every time you try to discuss articles of faith with someone who does know real history.
there is no comparison for evidence at all.

perhaps you'd like to start a new thread that gives evidence of why your faith is superior to anyone elses
i suggest that you do that before thinking of posting any more religious clap trap here in a forum dedicated to history
I suggest the ideal place to open that thread would be
somewhere else entirely
thankyou for your continued non cooperation


[edit on 14-2-2007 by Marduk]