Nungali Posted July 11, 2016 Ho ho. Har har . https://i.ytimg.com/vi/kdOPBP9vuZA/hqdefault.jpg Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Sternbach Posted July 11, 2016 (edited) Since the quoting issues still haven't been resolved (staff is working on it ), my comments are written in red. Nungali, on 04 Jul 2016 - 06:12 AM, said: You are targetting a whole bunch of ideas in this single paragraph that we need to look at one by one: It is in fact an old idea that a body of spiritual knowledge existed in and was disseminated from a lost culture. Sure, happens all the time. I dont dispute that at all. Thats what I was detailing above. While identifying that source as Atlantis may indeed be a relatively modern idea, there was a wide spread assumption amongst Church Fathers as well as Renaissance occultists that wisdom emanated from Hermes Trismegistos in an unbroken chain to Plato and beyond (see Frances Yates: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, p. 15 f.). Hermes (or Thoth/Tehuti) was seen as the founder of the ancient Egyptian culture, establishing writing, mathematics, law and other topics, including the occult sciences. of course, I am aware of that, I encountered the concept years ago in my early occult studies. Now I am also fascinated with Egyptology, History and other fields of research to get a more accurate picture. Things have come a long way since those days ... even in the last 20 years ! Even if the above founder is considered mythology, I have read accounts where some Greek philosophers are supposed to be Egyptian - its just that a Greek version of their name was passed down, or they were Greek but had an Egyptian teacher. Then again ancient Egypt was heavily influenced by the Mesopotamian cultures at various times. Indeed, the 'sudden' rise of the advance tech of Ancient Egypt has lead to man a theory and is one of my favorite subjects ... but nowadays from an empirical view. This is a huge subject. Most notably, modern advances in archaeology, ( one of which is we now have Aboriginal, Egyptian, Indian, South American archaeologists ) has been the revision and elimination - to an extent - and also due to newer finds , of the old 'Empire model' of developing cultures . I am rather chuffed at this , so I will repeat it here. After a lot of debate with professionals and others I came to the conclusion about why Egypt was able to advance the way it did , it has to do with a large multi-cultural input, a solid core of past tradition/practices ( building, religion, farming, etc ) , and the way they treated, interacted and adopted those cultures and technologies. Also how parts of it split of, developed further in isolation and came back to blend in the new - a type of social alchemy of 'circulation'. I put my idea out there. To my surprise one of the people I converse with, learn from, question, agreed with me . he is a curator and guide at an Egyptian museum in Chicago . He said "That is my view too ! many times visitors to the museum ask me that question, how did Egypt rise the way it did, and I tell them that is the conclusion I came to .: I can give you his online discussion address if you want to check on that. Or to follow the conversations. Please do. I would like to take a look at it. In fact, Adrian Gilbert, in the preface of his edition of the Corpus Hermeticum, also concludes that the Egyptian culture as we know it was the result of a blending of various cultures - Atlantis being one of them. I believe that's the way new cultures are being created in general. An excellent book on this is 'Ancient Egypt - from the First Farmers to The Great Pyramid' by John Romer (and John has an excellent intro on 'empirical based evidence' and the above mentioned dynamic of assuming cultures developed by bringing civilization to savages the way the British Empire did .... also, both ( empirical evidence and old ideas about Egypt being advanced by some advanced race - usually across the Red Sea into Upper Egypt via the Easter desert and Wadi Hamnamet ) are looked at in another good book ( to get an empirical perspective ) Genesis of the Pharaohs by Toby Wilkensen (which I reviewed on another thread here ) The Egyptians were convinced that the Gods once ruled their country directly. Further, there was a belief in a primaeval island on which they originally lived (see A. E. Reymond: The Mythical Origin of the Egyptian Temple, pp. 55 ff.) - so it takes no great leap to link this to the isle of Atlantis, the knowledge of which was preserved by Egyptian priests according to Plato. Yes, I know about that. Its a central core beginning part of Egyptian mythology. I do think you are taking a great leap to link the two together. If we detail Plato's Atlantis and the concepts of the 'primeval island' side by side, they would be very different. If we just say , they were both islands so there is no great leap to ink them as the same thing or related to the same thing .... nah ! The myth of Egyptian origins and the first island is clearly related to a later period anyway and to do with the flooding and receding of the Nile, the 'Dog Days' , agriculture, etc . To my knowledge, that "primeval island" has never been described in such detailed a manner as to allow to dismiss any similarity with Plato's Atlantis. It is also quite remarkable that the ancient Egyptians encoded the time of about 10.500 BC in the orientation of the Great Pyramid towards the Orion constellation, which was the time of the destruction of Atlantis previously given by Edgar Cayce and which doesn't deviate all that much from Plato (who gives 9500 BC). Now you are fudging Michael ... the ancient Egyptians did no such thing ! Its modern people that claim that. Now, you are giving Edgar Cayce as a source , that is occult history, I am talking about real history, archaeology, dating, cross referencing to vast amounts of knowledge collated and compared for years by Egyptology, anthropology, and translation of texts that the ancient Egyptians wrote themselves. I just find it remarkable that various sources (Plato, Cayce, South American texts) all referred to a great flood occurring roughly at the same time, which today we know to coincide with the end of the last Ice Age. Moreover, we find a similar story of a "deluge" also in Babylonian mythology and in the Bible. What I'm doing is not "fudging" - it's "fa-jing." Talking about South America, your objection that its cultures are too far removed in time from the Egyptian civilisation doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as, similarly to the latter, the Mayans and Aztecs believed that their cultures had descended from earlier times. The first period or "First Sun" ended with a great flood (Popol Vuh, Codex Vatico Latinus), which (according to the latter source) occurred in 11.025 BC. and the gap ? Are you suggesting that the recent development of South American cultures (and specifically I was thinking about how people relate the pyramids there to those of Egypt ) both had a mythology or contact with someone that enabled them somehow to build fantastic pyramids , 5000 years ago in Egypt, but somehow held the knowledge until the time the South American pyramids were built ? Yeah, that's weird. But hardly weirder than the fact that the Egyptians first learned and then lost the art of building perfect pyramids all of a sudden. See this relatively recent post of mine: http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/40620-the-origin-of-mankind/page-23#entry680006 Or are we going to claim all the dating is wrong and the Sphinx is also older and so are the pyramids in South America. I haven't looked into the South American pyramids that much yet. As for the Egyptian ones, we indeed can't be too sure about their age. There is relatively little evidence that the three Giza pyramids were actually built by the pharaohs they were named after, and so-called evidence to the contrary may have been dismissed too quickly by orthodox archaeology. See Graham Hancock: Fingerprints of the Gods, pp. 320 ff. Or is it a 'great leap' to think that people work in stone, eventually they get good at it, a pyramid is a structure naturally lends itself to such design ,,,, heck, its basically a pile of rocks stacked together ! That's how the comparatively unsuccessful architects before and after the 4th dynasty must have looked at the matter. Perhaps you were among them? Is it just coincidence that the Great Pyramids of Teotihuacan in Mexico were obviously built to represent the three belt stars of Orion, and that the larger of them has exactly the same base and half the height of the largest pyramid in Giza? http://coolinterestingstuff.com/ancient-pyramids-match-the-alignment-of-orions-belt That is not an idea that is currently accepted * , it floated for a while, but as I said above, a lot has been researched and discovered lately .... there is a wealth of interconnected resources and people with access to all the previous research and findings and papers ( peer reviewed thanks) and using today's modern IT ... are we really going to let that be over ruled by a guy sleeping and dreaming up stuff ? Peer reviewed means little more than other members of the same "faith" having found something acceptable for publication. And if we look at the history of science and technology, we find that it is often the stuff "a guy was dreaming up" that opens up the step of their evolution. I read the Orion Theory in the 70s and loved it ... but errrmmm .... haven't we moved on a bit from there ? ? / http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/scott-wolter-robert-bauval-and-the-orion-correlation I will present Hancock's response to his theory's "rebuttal"; may the interested reader of this thread draw their own conclusions. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/piramides/esp_piramide_9.htm This linked article provides insufficient references and is highly conjectural overall. Yes ... mixed with other stuff . Do you think that is outdated pop occult woo you might be reading ? No... I think that is biased conservative science hype you might be reading. Edited March 9, 2018 by Michael Sternbach Some orthographic corrections Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 11, 2016 Duat literally means 'star realm'. the glyphs in the middle right - a star in a circle and the letter 't' as an ending = Dw3t i.e. Duat. I know that . But that doesnt answer my question. Is not the Duat an 'underworld' realm , does not it describe a journey similar to those found on earth and not among the stars ? There are one or two references to a 'star journey' but mostly it is earthly like supernatural trails and tests. In any case the Egyptian concept of Duat is flelxable and changed over time ... in any case : (Regardless of its name .... I mean 'underworld' isnt literally down there in the lava. ) " The geography of Duat is similar in outline to the world the Egyptians knew. There are realistic features like rivers, islands, fields, lakes, mounds and caverns, along with fantastic lakes of fire, walls of iron and trees of turquoise" " In hour 1 the sun god enters the western horizon (akhet) which is a transition between day and night. In hours 2 and 3 he passes through an abundant watery world called 'Wernes' and the 'Waters of Osiris'. In hour 4 he reaches the difficult sandy realm of Sokar, the underworld hawk deity, where he encounters dark zig zag pathways which he has to negotiate, being dragged on a snake-boat. In hour 5 he discovers the tomb of Osiris which is an enclosure beneath which is hidden a lake of fire, the tomb is covered by a pyramid like mound (identified with the goddess Isis) and on top of which Isis and Nephthys have alighted in the form of two kites (birds of prey). In the sixth hour the most significant event in the underworld occurs. The ba (or soul) of Ra unites with his own body, or alternatively with the ba of Osiris within the circle formed by the mehen serpent. This event is the point at which the sun begins its regeneration; it is a moment of great significance, but also danger, as beyond it in hour 7 the adversaryApep (Apophis) lies in wait and has to be subdued by the magic of Isis, and the strength of Set assisted by Serqet. Once this has been done the sun god opens the doors of the tomb in hour 8 and then leaves the sandy island of Sokar by rowing vigorously back into the waters in hour 9. In hour 10 the regeneration process continues through immersion in the waters until in hour 11 the god's eyes (a symbol for his health and well being) are fully regenerated. In hour 12 he enters the eastern horizon ready to rise again as the new day's sun." - Amduat " It narrates the passage of a newly deceased soul into the next world, corresponding to the journey of the sun through the underworld during the hours of the night. The soul is required to pass through a series of 'gates' at different stages in the journey. Each gate is associated with a different goddess, and requires that the deceased recognise the particular character of that deity. The text implies that some people will pass through unharmed, but that others will suffer torment in a lake of fire. " - The Book of Gates. " The Book of Caverns is an important Ancient Egyptian netherworld book of the New Kingdom.[1] Like all other netherworld books, it is also attested on the inside of kings’ tombs for the benefit of the deceased. It describes the journey of the sun god Ra through the six caverns of the underworld, focusing on the interaction between the sun god and the inhabitants of the netherworld, including rewards for the righteous and punishments for the enemies of the worldly order, those who fail their judgment in the afterlife. The Book of Caverns is one of the best sources of information about the Egyptian concept of hell." - The Book of Caverns. Its mostly about defeating the Apech serpent ..... I mean the Apep serpent . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Sternbach Posted July 11, 2016 I know that . But that doesnt answer my question. Is not the Duat an 'underworld' realm , does not it describe a journey similar to those found on earth and not among the stars ? See the Pyramid Texts Online Utterance 216 151: Orion is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. Sothis is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. This Unas is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. He is content because of them, he is refreshed because of them, in the arms of His father, in the arms of Atum. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 11, 2016 Since the quoting issues still haven't been resolved (staff is working on it ), my comments are written in red. and since we have used up plain. italics, bold and red, I will respond in green Nungali, on 04 Jul 2016 - 06:12 AM, said: You are targetting a whole bunch of ideas in this single paragraph that we need to look at one by one: It is in fact an old idea that a body of spiritual knowledge existed in and was dissiminated from a lost culture. Sure, happens all the time. I dont dispute that at all. Thats what I was detailing above. While identifying that source as Atlantis may indeed be relatively modern idea, there was a wide spread assumption amongst Church Fathers as well as Renaissance occultists that wisdom emanated from Hermes Trismegistos in an unbroken chain to Plato and beyond (see Frances Yates: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, i.e. p. 15 f.). Hermes (or Thoth/Tehuti) was seen as the founder of the ancient Egyptian culture, establishing writing, mathematics, law, and other topics, including the occult sciences. of course, I am aware of that, I encountered the concept years ago in my early occult studies. Now I am also fascinated with Egyptology, History and other fields of research to get a more accurate picture. Things have come a long way since those days ... even in the last 20 years ! Even if the above founder is considered mythology, I have read accounts where some Greek philosophers are supposed to be Egyptian - its just that a Greek version of their name was passed down, or they were Greek but had an Egyptian teacher. Then again ancient Egypt was heavily influenced by the Mesopotamian cultures at various times. Indeed, the 'sudden' rise of the advance tech of Ancient Egypt has lead to man a theory and is one of my favorite subjects ... but nowadays from an empirical view. This is a huge subject. Most notably, modern advances in archaeology, ( one of which is we now have Aboriginal, Egyptian, Indian, South American archaeologists ) has been the revision and elimination - to an extent - and also due to newer finds , of the old 'Empire model' of developing cultures . I am rather chuffed at this , so I will repeat it here. After a lot of debate with professionals and others I came to the conclusion about why Egypt was able to advance the way it did , it has to do with a large multi-cultural input, a solid core of past tradition/practices ( building, religion, farming, etc ) , and the way they treated, interacted and adopted those cultures and technologies. Also how parts of it split of, developed further in isolation and came back to blend in the new - a type of social alchemy of 'circulation'. I put my idea out there. To my surprise one of the people I converse with, learn from, question, agreed with me . he is a curator and guide at an Egyptian museum in Chicago . He said "That is my view too ! many times visitors to the museum ask me that question, how did Egypt rise the way it did, and I tell them that is the conclusion I came to .: I can give you his online discussion address if you want to check on that. Or to follow the conversations. Please do. I would like to take a look at it. http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/278430-the-earliest-egyptians/ and maybe these too ? http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/293930-giza-geometry-and-star-alignments/ http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/289893-egyptian-connection-to-gobekli-tepe/ http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/162971-puma-punku/ http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/topic/279319-was-atlantis-on-the-moroccan-coast/ have fun In fact, Adrian Gilbert, in the preface of his edition of the Corpus Hermeticum, also concludes that the Egyptian culture as we know it was the result of a blending of various cultures - Atlantis being one of them. I believe, that's the way new cultures are being created in general. An excellent book on this is 'Ancient Egypt - from the First Farmers to The Great Pyramid' by John Romer (and John has an excellent intro on 'empirical based evidence' and the above mentioned dynamic of assuming cultures developed by bringing civilization to savages the way the British Empire did .... also, both ( empirical evidence and old ideas about Egypt being advanced by some advanced race - usually across the Red Sea into Upper Egypt via the Easter desert and Wadi Hamnamet ) are looked at in another good book ( to get an empirical perspective ) Genesis of the Pharaohs by Toby Wilkensen (which I reviewed on another thread here ) The Egyptians were convinced that the Gods once ruled their country directly. Further, there was a belief in a primaeval island on which they originally lived (see A. E. Reymond: The Mythical Origin of the Egyptian Temple, p. 55 ff.) - so it takes no great leap to link this to the isle of Atlantis, the knowledge of which was preserved by Egyptian priests according to Plato. Yes, I know about that. Its a central core beginning part of Egyptian mythology. I do think you are taking a great leap to link the two together. If we detail Plato's Atlantis and the concepts of the 'primeval island' side by side, they would be very different. If we just say , they were both islands so there is no great leap to ink them as the same thing or related to the same thing .... nah ! The myth of Egyptian origins and the first island is clearly related to a later period anyway and to do with the flooding and receding of the Nile, the 'Dog Days' , agriculture, etc . To my knowledge, that "primeval island" has never been described in such detailed a manner as to dismiss any similarity with Plato's Atlantis. Do you realise they are all a bit different , there is not one set of Egyptian beliefs. Rosemary Clark collates about 6 of the major ones very well in her Books on Ancient Egypt traditions and practice here is one 'regional ' view http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/nun.htm I am sure you can find more to show you the details so you can understand what I mean. It is also quite remarkable that the ancient Egyptians encoded the time of about 10.500 BC in the orientation of the Great Pyramid towards the Orion constellation, which was the time of the destruction of Atlantis previously given by Edgar Cayce and which doesn't deviate all that much from Plato (who gives 9500 BC). Now you are fudging Michael ... the ancient Egyptians did no such thing ! Its modern people that claim that. Now, you are giving Edgar Cayce as a source , that is occult history, I am talking about real history, archaeology, dating, cross referencing to vast amounts of knowledge collated and compared for years by Egyptology, anthropology, and translation of texts that the ancient Egyptians wrote themselves. I just find it remarkable that various sources (Plato, Cayce, South American texts) all referred to a great flood ocurring roughly at the same time, which today we know to coincide with the end of the last Ice Age. Moreover, we find a similar story of a "deluge" also in Babylonian mythology and in the Bible. What I'm doing is not "fudging" - it's "fa-jing." Okay, but I and many others dont find it remarkable that people talk about the memory of flood at the same time as the sea level rose. Why is it remarkable that if the sea level rose all over the world, people all over the world remembered that ... how does that support some global early civilization that taught everyone advanced technology ??? The fudging comment was directed to you saying the ancient Egyptians aligned the 3 Pyramids at Giza to represent stars a la Buval , which has been debunked. A lot of time is being used up here keeping tac against these puffs of stray wind . I know you would like my boat upset here ... but surely we can follow the conversation a bit better and not lay so many slippery red fish where I am stepping ... hmmmmm ? I will answer any question if I can ... that is in a sensible linear logic to the conversation . Lots of places flooded then . There was no world wide flood though. There is no flood mythology in My country, we dont have high or vast mountain ranges or big rivers, we have stories about the sea rising, and 'slow floods' spreading across the land, from the sea. Babalyonia myths record them as they lived between two big rivers with large mountains upstream. The Avestas climate disaster was cold , a freezing, maybe the 'younger dryas' (or maybe that is too early) Talking about South America, your objection that its cultures are too far removed in time from the Egyptian civilisation doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as, similarly to the latter, the Mayans and Aztecs believed that their cultures had descended from earlier times. The first period or "First Sun" ended with a great flood (Popol Vuh, Codex Vatico Latinus), which (according to the latter source) occurred in 11.025 BC. and the gap ? Are you suggesting that the recent development of South American cultures (and specifically I was thinking about how people relate the pyramids there to those of Egypt ) both had a mythology or contact with someone that enabled them somehow to build fantastic pyramids , 5000 years ago in Egypt, but somehow held the knowledge until the time the South American pyramids were built ? Yeah, that's weird. But hardly weirder than the fact that the Egyptians first learned and then lost the art of building perfect pyramids all of a sudden. See this relatively recent post of mine: And this is what happens. Someone makes a statement and it accepted as fact, years later people are using these false facts as if they are general true info and dont even bother researching them .... of course the world is flat ...... in short , please list what perfections you see in those pyramids construction, alignments, or whatever , and look at the marvels of construction in , say, The New Kingdom (Egypt's 'Golden Age ' of building ) and list the faults or why it isnt better than the building at the Giza complex. here is anther example, using the angle and alignment of the 'air shafts' in the Great Pyramid supposedly 'pointing at' stars back in time ... ... has anyone actually seen a correct drawing plan of all the angles and turns and change in slope of those shafts ? They are all over the place ! (yet most drawings look this, and I did too, until I was helped to see what is going by others. ... and all these little points take up a lot of time, extensive exploration of the concept and detailed tech drawing quality plans of the shafts are available in threads on the site I linked to above . I cant spend all day doing someone else's research for them. ) and people just accept that ... and use it as part of the 'factual evidence' and some see.m outraged or upset if one even suggests otherwise (no, not you, but it happens a lot ! ) http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/40620-the-origin-of-mankind/page-23#entry680006 Or are we going to claim all the dating is wrong and the Sphinx is also older and so are the pyramids in South America. I haven't looked into the South American pyramids that much yet. As for the Egyptian ones, we indeed can't be too sure about their age. There is relatively little evidence that the three Giza pyramids were actually built by the pharaohs they were named after, and so called evidence to the contrary may have been dismissed too quickly by orthodox archaeology. See Graham Hancock: Fingerprints of the Gods, p. 320 ff. No! You go and look up the last 50 years of Egyptology research study and well documented and peer reviewed papers put out by professionals ! You are still doing it! Handcock has been well and truly debunked Micheal ... yet you choose to believe some sensationalist author out to make money and want to doubt the whole collated field of Egyptology. next you will be telling me, everything except what you have chosen to believe is a conspiracy ... and of course then, I would be part of it. .... I actually hope not, dont go down that path .. Or is it a 'great leap' to think that people work in stone, eventually they get good at it, a pyramid is a structure naturally lends itself to such design ,,,, heck, its basically a pile of rocks stacked together ! That's how the comparatively unsuccessful architects before and after the 4th dynasty must have looked at the matter. Perhaps you were among them? You will have to explain more what you mean here . I will await your response on this 4th dynasty building perfection you seem to know about. Is it just coincidence that the Great Pyramids of Teotihuacan in Mexico were obviously built to represent the three belt stars of Orion, and that the larger of them has exactly the same base and half the height of the largest pyramid in Giza? http://coolinterestingstuff.com/ancient-pyramids-match-the-alignment-of-orions-belt That is not an idea that is currently accepted * , it floated for a while, but as I said above, a lot has been researched and discovered lately .... there is a wealth of interconnected resources and people with access to all the previous research and findings and papers ( peer reviewed thanks) and using today's modern IT ... are we really going to let that be over ruled by a guy sleeping and dreaming up stuff ? Peer reviewed means little more than other members of the same "faith" having found something acceptable for publication. And if we look at the history of science and technology, we find that it is often the stuff "a guy was dreaming up" that opens up the step of their evolution. Look, if academia is of no use to you I will bow out of this right now and file it under 'another lost to woo ' - these are arguments flat / hollow earthers use . I read the Orion Theory in the 70s and loved it ... but errrmmm .... haven't we moved on a bit from there ? ? / http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/scott-wolter-robert-bauval-and-the-orion-correlation I will present Hancock's response to his theory's "rebuttal"; may the interested reader of this thread draw their own conclusions. http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/piramides/esp_piramide_9.htm This linked article provides insufficient references and is highly conjectural overall. Oh come on now ... Hancock ??? Seriously ? Yes ... mixed with other stuff . Do you think that is outdated pop occult woo you might be reading ? No... I think that is biased conservative science hype you might be reading. Its called Egyptology Micheal, and if you prefer internet woo and best selling authors to create your map of reality, that is up to you. Actually, I beginning to think you are desperately trying to hold up your own icons, like Edgar Cayce and your attachment to post Victorian occultism (that was based on the science . finds and Egyptology of THOSE times ) which has stayed back there and not accepted the more modern science and Egyptology that has developed since. Its like some type of 'occult time warp' ! Actually. most occultists do this , accept post Victorian science ideas that modified the old beliefs ... but protest when any new modern science findings or Egyptology tries to modify what we do know about those things. Mhe ... in the words of a great Australian ; "Such is life ." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 11, 2016 See the Pyramid Texts Online Utterance 216 151: Orion is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. Sothis is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. This Unas is encircled by the Duat, when the One-who-lives-in-the-Horizon purifies himself. He is content because of them, he is refreshed because of them, in the arms of His father, in the arms of Atum. That didnt answer my question either ... maybe you should add your own comment to show what significance you think this extract has .... dont leave it up in the air for me to interpret , I will interpret it my way then . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 11, 2016 I know that . But that doesnt answer my question. Is not the Duat an 'underworld' realm , does not it describe a journey similar to those found on earth and not among the stars ? There are one or two references to a 'star journey' but mostly it is earthly like supernatural trails and tests. In any case the Egyptian concept of Duat is flelxable and changed over time ... in any case : (Regardless of its name .... I mean 'underworld' isnt literally down there in the lava. ) " The geography of Duat is similar in outline to the world the Egyptians knew. There are realistic features like rivers, islands, fields, lakes, mounds and caverns, along with fantastic lakes of fire, walls of iron and trees of turquoise" " In hour 1 the sun god enters the western horizon (akhet) which is a transition between day and night. In hours 2 and 3 he passes through an abundant watery world called 'Wernes' and the 'Waters of Osiris'. In hour 4 he reaches the difficult sandy realm of Sokar, the underworld hawk deity, where he encounters dark zig zag pathways which he has to negotiate, being dragged on a snake-boat. In hour 5 he discovers the tomb of Osiris which is an enclosure beneath which is hidden a lake of fire, the tomb is covered by a pyramid like mound (identified with the goddess Isis) and on top of which Isis and Nephthys have alighted in the form of two kites (birds of prey). In the sixth hour the most significant event in the underworld occurs. The ba (or soul) of Ra unites with his own body, or alternatively with the ba of Osiris within the circle formed by the mehen serpent. This event is the point at which the sun begins its regeneration; it is a moment of great significance, but also danger, as beyond it in hour 7 the adversaryApep (Apophis) lies in wait and has to be subdued by the magic of Isis, and the strength of Set assisted by Serqet. Once this has been done the sun god opens the doors of the tomb in hour 8 and then leaves the sandy island of Sokar by rowing vigorously back into the waters in hour 9. In hour 10 the regeneration process continues through immersion in the waters until in hour 11 the god's eyes (a symbol for his health and well being) are fully regenerated. In hour 12 he enters the eastern horizon ready to rise again as the new day's sun." - Amduat " It narrates the passage of a newly deceased soul into the next world, corresponding to the journey of the sun through the underworld during the hours of the night. The soul is required to pass through a series of 'gates' at different stages in the journey. Each gate is associated with a different goddess, and requires that the deceased recognise the particular character of that deity. The text implies that some people will pass through unharmed, but that others will suffer torment in a lake of fire. " - The Book of Gates. " The Book of Caverns is an important Ancient Egyptian netherworld book of the New Kingdom.[1] Like all other netherworld books, it is also attested on the inside of kings’ tombs for the benefit of the deceased. It describes the journey of the sun god Ra through the six caverns of the underworld, focusing on the interaction between the sun god and the inhabitants of the netherworld, including rewards for the righteous and punishments for the enemies of the worldly order, those who fail their judgment in the afterlife. The Book of Caverns is one of the best sources of information about the Egyptian concept of hell." - The Book of Caverns. Its mostly about defeating the Apech serpent ..... I mean the Apep serpent . As a general point guys - I can't cope with these long posts with interspersed responses in quotes so there's probably lots of stuff I could respond to but I just scrolled past. The Duat If that quote is from Wiki then I have to say it is excellent - cos I wrote it !!!!! What I obviously didn't mention is that the Duat is both within the body of Nut and the body of Geb. This is a difficult idea for us to hold because we have become terribly literal. The reason for this, by my interpretation, that the Duat refers to a kind of inner space which exist within everything - produced by the penetration of the waters of Nun of all existence - that is the void permeates creation. get it? So it is the same space that we enter in dreams, in shamanic experiences and so on. An inner realm. I could say more but it would have nothing to do with Atlantis. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 11, 2016 (edited) Ahhh ... here is another 'contribution', although somewhat different from Marbleheads and one more intellectually appreciated ... As I said above I can't do this quote thing. There is certain evidence (although I would have to dig for references) of contact and trade between the Indus Valley Culture and Mesopotamia. The origin of the Aryan culture is of course disputed but whatever AM theory is right it seems certain to me that there was a lot of integration with late Harrapan and the Aryan tribes. For instance the Saraswati River is the most mentioned river in the Rg Veda and geologist have identified a dried up river valley flowing parallel to the Indus which dried up about 1900 BC - while the date of the Rg Veda is usually given as 1200 BC - suggesting much longer periods of settling and integration. Edited July 11, 2016 by Apech 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 12, 2016 As a general point guys - I can't cope with these long posts with interspersed responses in quotes so there's probably lots of stuff I could respond to but I just scrolled past. The Duat If that quote is from Wiki then I have to say it is excellent - cos I wrote it !!!!! What I obviously didn't mention is that the Duat is both within the body of Nut and the body of Geb. This is a difficult idea for us to hold because we have become terribly literal. The reason for this, by my interpretation, that the Duat refers to a kind of inner space which exist within everything - produced by the penetration of the waters of Nun of all existence - that is the void permeates creation. get it? So it is the same space that we enter in dreams, in shamanic experiences and so on. An inner realm. I could say more but it would have nothing to do with Atlantis. Exactly ! I wasnt going to post that I saw it as a journey through the psyche (modified by local geography, 'religion', cultural mores and taboos ) .... but, there it is ^ . I do get it, it is a very old concept and STILL believed in here .... it got mistranslated and misinterpreted somewhat when someone translated the various language group terms for it into 'Dreamtime' . Thanks for the explanation linking Nut and Geb , for some reason I had not thought of that . Do say more.... I dont think Lois will be too upset at the OT . ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 12, 2016 (edited) As I said above I can't do this quote thing. There is certain evidence (although I would have to dig for references) of contact and trade between the Indus Valley Culture and Mesopotamia. The origin of the Aryan culture is of course disputed but whatever AM theory is right it seems certain to me that there was a lot of integration with late Harrapan and the Aryan tribes. For instance the Saraswati River is the most mentioned river in the Rg Veda and geologist have identified a dried up river valley flowing parallel to the Indus which dried up about 1900 BC - while the date of the Rg Veda is usually given as 1200 BC - suggesting much longer periods of settling and integration. Hopefully the quote thingo will be sorted soon ... its unfortunate as you may have missed a wealth of information contained in my posts here is another way of looking at your post above - I hope you dont mind if I rewrite it a bit ? There is certain evidence (in the earliest Vedas and the Avestas - most noticeably in 'The Vendidad; and epic / heroic / cyclic tales like 'The Shamaneh' and of course the famous 'treaty' * ) of contact and trade between the Indus Valley Culture (known to the P.I.E. / Aryan peoples as 'Hapta Hindu ' - the 'Upper Indus' { and also other 'nations' in the area; Harahvaiti - Kandahar , Vaekereta - Kabul , and others south of the Hindu Kush } ) and (particularly northern ) 'Mesopotamia', with the 'nations' known as ' Ranghaya or Rangha - Upper Tigris { and other nations north of the Zargos along the southern shores of the Caspian Sea. As I wrote above, there seemed no infiltration into lower Tigris / Euphrates , and through the Zargos to the south until much later, when 'Medes' began to penetrate through the Zargos and become known to the Assyrians . We can see how the land form may have helped define, separate and allow trade routes between these people ( Zargos in green ) ; The origin of the Aryan culture is of course disputed but whatever AM theory is right it seems certain to me that there was a lot of integration with late Harrapan and the Aryan tribes. Yep, I agree. That is until the 'Great War of Religion' period. For instance the Saraswati River is the most mentioned river in the Rg Veda and geologist have identified a dried up river valley flowing parallel to the Indus which dried up about 1900 BC - while the date of the Rg Veda is usually given as 1200 BC - suggesting much longer periods of settling and integration. * Some theonyms, proper names and other terminology of the Mitanni are considered to form (part of) an Indo-Aryan superstrate, suggesting that an Indo-Aryan elite imposed itself over the Hurrian population in the course of the Indo-Aryan expansion. In a treaty between the Hittites and the Mitanni (between Suppiluliuma and Shattiwaza, c. 1380 BC), the deities Mitra, Varuna, Indra, and Nasatya (Ashvins) are invoked. Kikkuli's horse training text (circa 1400 BC) includes technical terms such as aika (Vedic Sanskrit eka, one), tera (tri, three), panza (pañca, five), satta (sapta, seven), na (nava, nine),vartana (vartana, round). The numeral aika "one" is of particular importance because it places the superstrate in the vicinity of Indo-Aryan proper (Vedic Sanskrit eka, with regular contraction of /ai/ to [eː]) as opposed to Indo-Iranian or early Iranian (which has *aiva; compare Vedic eva "only") in general. Another text has babru(-nnu) (babhru, brown), parita(-nnu) (palita, grey), and pinkara(-nnu) (pingala, red). Their chief festival was the celebration of the solstice (vishuva) which was common in most cultures in the ancient world. The Mitanni warriors were called marya (Hurrian: maria-nnu), the term for (young) warrior in Sanskrit as well;[1] note mišta-nnu (= miẓḍha,~ Sanskrit mīḍha) "payment (for catching a fugitive)" (Mayrhofer II 358). Sanskritic interpretations of Mitanni names render Artashumara (artaššumara) as Arta-smara "who thinks of Arta/Ṛta" (Mayrhofer II 780), Biridashva (biridašṷa, biriiašṷa) as Prītāśva "whose horse is dear" (Mayrhofer II 182), Priyamazda (priiamazda) as Priyamedha "whose wisdom is dear" (Mayrhofer II 189, II378), Citrarata as citraratha "whose chariot is shining" (Mayrhofer I 553), Indaruda/Endaruta as Indrota "helped by Indra" (Mayrhofer I 134), Shativaza (šattiṷaza) as Sātivāja "winning the race price" (Mayrhofer II 540, 696), Šubandhu as Subandhu 'having good relatives" (a name in Palestine, Mayrhofer II 209, 735), Tushratta (tṷišeratta, tušratta, etc.) as *tṷaišaratha, Vedic Tveṣaratha "whose chariot is vehement" (Mayrhofer I 686, I 736). Archaeologists have attested a striking parallel in the spread to Syria of a distinct pottery type associated with what they call the Kura-Araxes culture.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Aryan_superstrate_in_Mitanni ( hope you didnt write that as well ) ... and *Chakhrem is used in Yasht 13.89 and means wheel (or revolving; cf. Persian charkh meaning wheel) and is used there as chakhrem urvaesayata in the context of Zarathushtra being the first member of every professional guild opposed to the daevas. Avestan Chakhrem urvaesayata is similar to the Sanskrit chakhram vartay and chakhravartin meaning 'chariot over the land' or 'ruler'. The western Mitanni were known for their expertise in chariot-building and this may or may not have relevance. ** The seven Indus Rivers, Hapta Hindu (nation #15 above), are: 1. the Indus (Veda-Sindhu), the 2. Kabul and 3. Kurram rivers joining on the west and north banks of the Indus, and the 4. Jhelum (Veda-Vitasta), 5. Chenab (Veda-Asikni), 6. Ravi (Veda-Airovati), and 7. Sutlej/Beas (Veda-Vipasa) rivers joining the Indus' east and south banks. (There is some discussion that the Saraswati River mentioned in Hindu Vedic texts was also an Indus tributary - though this is not clear.) The Hindu texts are mainly concerned with the eastern & southern tributaries while the Zoroastrian texts are concerned with the upper reaches of the Indus and all its tributaries whose valleys would have provided access to the plains - areas north and west of the Punjab (Panj-ab meaning five waters in Persian) - i.e. present-day North-West Frontier Province in Northern Pakistan, Northern Punjab and Kashmir in India and Pakistan. *** Gandhara/Waihind. The land of the upper Indus basin was known as Gandhara or Waihind. Today, the region has Peshawar, Mardan, Mingora and Chitral as its main cities. It would have extended into all the habitable valleys of the south-eastern Hindu Kush. The Gandhara/Waihind region includes the Indus, Swat, Chitral and Kabul River valleys. It may have extended south to Takshashila (Taxila) (near present-day Islamabad) and present-day Jalalabad, Afghanistan, in the west, thus bordering Vaekerata (Kabul) to the east. http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/aryans/airyanavaeja.htm There is also the origin of the 'caste system' , very similar between Iranian surviving Zoroastrians and Hindus, differences are the Zoroastrian version is not set by birth, and it is also seen as a rite of passage that women can do, in Iran, initiated women and men wear the red thread as well and partake equally in the ceremonies . Edited July 12, 2016 by Nungali Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 12, 2016 @Nungali I formally challenge you to write about this subject without any block quotes from wikipedia. I demand satisfaction. *slaps cheek with glove then says ouch realising it's his own cheek*. Anyway why are we discussing the late Bronze Age/Early Iron age when our Lord Lois opened a thread on Atlantis? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 12, 2016 @Nungali I formally challenge you to write about this subject without any block quotes from wikipedia. I demand satisfaction. *slaps cheek with glove then says ouch realising it's his own cheek*. Welll .... Oh, you won't read this reply will you because the quote function is still broken ... I know I will write in yellow ... is this betterIn ancient Egyptian cosmology, the Earth was thought to be flat and oval-shaped, and surrounded by oceans. Underneath this earth lay the vast expanse of the underworld, which also had the primordial waters of Nun running through them.For more on Nun and the primordial state of the universe before and during creation, check out the ancient Egyptian creation myth..There were trees and mountains as well as rivers, but also lakes of fire, dark caverns, evil spirits and serpents.The ruler of the underworld was the God Osiris. Osiris was actually the King of the Earth prior to becoming “Lord of Duat”.But then his brother Seth murdered him out of jealousy… and although Isis, together with other helpful deities, tried to restore her beloved husband, he could only be revived on earth for a day and then had to become the Osiris of the Underworld.But Duat was visited by many other deities as well as inhabited by other supernatural creatures. Some deities were helpful to the deceased on their path through the underworld and judgment, while others could be harmful and provide challenges for the deceased to overcome. Anyway why are we discussing the late Bronze Age/Early Iron age when our Lord Lois opened a thread on Atlantis? or, if you prefer I will just write down here " I formally challenge you ... " Right ... just one moment please ..... ... Damn ... wrong outfit ! Hang on a minute, I will be back ..... .... Thats better ... now, where where we ? " ... to write about this subject without any block quotes from wikipedia. I demand satisfaction. " You are on .... here we go ; What do you call a male sibling? If you speak English, he is your “brother.” Greek? Call him “phrater.” Sanskrit, Latin, Old Irish? “Bhrater,” “frater,” or “brathir,” respectively. Ever since the mid-17th century, scholars have noted such similarities among the so-called Indo-European languages, which span the world and number more than 400 if dialects are included. Researchers agree that they can probably all be traced back to one ancestral language, called Proto-Indo-European (PIE). But for nearly 20 years, scholars have debated vehemently when and where PIE arose. Two long-awaited studies, one described online this week in a preprint and another scheduled for publication later this month, have now used different methods to support one leading hypothesis: that PIE was first spoken by pastoral herders who lived in the vast steppe lands north of the Black Sea beginning about 6000 years ago. One study points out that these steppe land herders have left their genetic mark on most Europeans living today. The studies’ conclusions emerge from state-of-the-art ancient DNA and linguistic analyses, but the debate over PIE’s origins is likely to continue. A rival hypothesis—that early farmers living in Anatolia (modern Turkey) about 8000 years ago were the original PIE speakers—is not ruled out by the new analyses, most agree. Although the steppe hypothesis has now received a major boost, “I would not say the Anatolian hypothesis has been killed,” says Carles Lalueza-Fox, a geneticist at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain, who participated in neither of the new studies. Up until the 1980s, variations of the steppe hypothesis held sway among most linguists and archaeologists tracking down Indo-European’s birthplace. Then in 1987, archaeologist Colin Renfrew of the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom proposed that PIE spread with farming from its origins in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East, moving west into Europe and east further into Asia; over time the languages continued to spread and diversify into the many Indo-European languages we know today. Traditional linguists, meanwhile, painstakingly reconstructed PIE by extrapolating back from modern languages and ancient writings. (Listen to a short fable spoken in PIE here.) They disdained Renfrew’s idea of an Anatolian homeland, arguing for example that the languages were still too similar to have begun diverging 8000 years ago. But many archaeologists noted that genetic and archaeological studies did indeed suggest massive ancient migrations from the Middle East into Europe that could have brought PIE and sparked such language diversification. In 2003, evolutionary biologists Russell Gray and Quentin Atkinson of the University of Auckland in New Zealand used computational methods from evolutionary biology to track words as they changed over time, and concluded that the Anatolian hypothesis was right. But steppe supporters remained unconvinced, even after Gray’s team published a confirming analysis in Science in 2012. Fans of the steppe hypothesis are now hailing a genetics study that used ancient DNA from 69 Europeans who lived between 8000 and 3000 years ago to genetically track ancient population movements. The work, now posted on the bioRxiv preprint server, was done by a large team led by geneticists David Reich and Iosif Lazaridis of Harvard Medical School in Boston and Wolfgang Haak of the University of Adelaide in Australia. Among the team’s samples were nine ancient individuals—six males, two females, and a child of undetermined sex—from the Yamnaya culture north of the Black Sea in today’s Russia. Beginning about 6000 years ago, these steppe people herded cattle and other animals, buried their dead in earthen mounds called kurgans, and may have created some of the first wheeled vehicles. (Many linguists think PIE already had a word for “wheel.”) The team also retrieved ancient DNA from four skeletons from the later Corded Ware culture of central Europe, known for the distinctive pottery for which they are named (see photo above), as well as their dairy farming skills. Archaeologists had noted similarities among these cultures, especially in their emphasis on cattle herding. The team focused on sections of DNA that they suspected would provide markers for past population movements and identified nearly 400,000 DNA positions across the genome in each individual. They used new techniques to zero in on the key positions in the nuclear DNA, allowing them to analyze twice as many ancient nuclear DNA samples from Europe and Asia as previously reported in the entire literature. The comparison of the two cultures’ DNA showed that the four Corded Ware people could trace an astonishing three-quarters of their ancestry to the Yamnaya. That suggests a massive migration of Yamnaya people from their steppe homeland into central Europe about 4500 years ago, one that could have spread an early form of the Indo-European language, the team concludes. Thus the paper for the first time links two far-flung material cultures to specific genetic signatures and to each other—and suggests, the team says, that they spoke a form of Indo-European. The Corded Ware culture soon spread across north and central Europe, extending as far as today’s Scandinavia. So the “steppe ancestry,” as the authors of the preprint call it, is found in most present-day Europeans, who can trace their ancestry back to both the Corded Ware people and the earlier Yamnaya. The work thus adds to genetic findings from last fall showing that the genetic makeup of today’s Europeans is more complicated than anyone expected. The results are a “smoking gun” that an ancient migration into Europe from the steppe occurred, says Pontus Skoglund, an ancient DNA specialist who is now working in Reich’s lab but was not a co-author on the paper. (Although the paper is publicly available on a preprint server, it is not yet published, and the authors declined to discuss their work until it’s published.) The paper “levels the playing field between the steppe hypothesis and the Anatolian hypothesis by showing that the spread of farming was not the only large migration into Europe,” Skoglund says. The second new paper to address PIE’s origin, in press at Language and due to be published online during the last week of February, uses linguistic data to focus on when PIE arose. A team led by University of California, Berkeley, linguists Andrew Garrett and Will Chang employed the language database and evolutionary methods previously used by Gray to create a family tree of the Indo-European languages from their first origins in PIE. But in certain cases, Garrett and Chang’s group declared that one language was directly ancestral to another and put that into their tree as a certainty. For example, they assumed that Latin was directly ancestral to Romance languages such as Spanish, French, and Italian—something that many but not all linguists agree on—and that Vedic Sanskrit was directly ancestral to the Indo-Aryan languages spoken on the Indian subcontinent. These constraints transformed the results from what Gray’s team has published: Garrett, Chang, and their colleagues found that the origins of PIE were about 6000 years ago, consistent with the steppe hypothesis but not the Anatolian, because the farming migration out of the Middle East was 8000 years ago. Once the original PIE speakers began to sweep out of the steppes about 4500 years ago, their languages spread and diversified, Garrett’s team says. But many supporters of the Anatolian hypothesis remain staunchly unconvinced. Paul Heggarty, a linguist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, questions Garrett’s methods, arguing that, for example, linguists cannot be sure if the Latin attested to in written documents really was the direct ancestor of later Romance languages, rather than some dialect of Latin for which no record remains. Even small differences in the true ancestral language, Heggarty insists, could throw off the timing estimates. As for the Reich paper, many archaeologists and linguists praise the data on ancient migrations. But they challenge what they see as its speculative link to language. The movement out of the steppes, Renfrew says, “may be a secondary migration into central Europe 3000 to 4000 years later than the spread of farmers, which first brought Indo-European speech to Europe.” If so, the Yamnaya steppe people would not have spoken PIE but an already derived Indo-European tongue ancestral to today’s Balto-Slavic languages such as Russian and Polish, Heggarty says. He adds that the wording of the Reich paper is “misleading.” Indeed, in a lengthy discussion in the paper’s Supplementary Information section, Reich and colleagues do concede that “the ultimate question of the Proto-Indo-European homeland is unresolved by our data.” They suggest that more ancient DNA, especially from points east of the steppes, may finally tie our linguistic history with our genes. ..... not one word from Wikipedia ! " Anyway why are we discussing the late Bronze Age/Early Iron age when our Lord Lois opened a thread on Atlantis? " 1. because this is more interesting 2. Because Lois is dead - terrible train wreck in Moscow last tuesday, just after lunch. Lois wasnt on the train though, he was watching from a distance and fell right into an open manhole. . 3. It wasnt me who bought it up anyway , if you read carefully through every post of the last 10 pages you will see . 4. I'm really just killing time till Micheal returns with the new info abut Atlantis he was going to get from his new books (I mean I WAS patiently waiting but he tried to close the right flank on me by trying to get that old Plato army trick up . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 13, 2016 @Nungas You're right that is more interesting - and you wrote all that yourself without any copy/paste type tricks! I am confused though. 1. Latin may not be the ancestor of Romance languages ? I naively assumed the Romance languages existed because of the jolly Roman Empire which spread Latin ... or are they saying that the extant languages in France, Spain, Portugal and Romania were already Latinesque/Aryan before the Romans. 2 . They talk about the spread of farming ... and yet I also understood that the Aryans in the Vedas were pastoralists ... and they certainly didn't bring farming to the Indus Valley who already had irrigation systems and fields ... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 13, 2016 @Nungas You're right that is more interesting - and you wrote all that yourself without any copy/paste type tricks! No .... you just said with out Wikipedia . That was nt Wikipedia. I am confused though. Yeah. 1. Latin may not be the ancestor of Romance languages ? I naively assumed the Romance languages existed because of the jolly Roman Empire which spread Latin ... or are they saying that the extant languages in France, Spain, Portugal and Romania were already Latinesque/Aryan before the Romans. Awww cripes ...do I have to change my outfit again ! half a mo .... I do believe it was the 2nd one . 2 . They talk about the spread of farming ... and yet I also understood that the Aryans in the Vedas were pastoralists ... Yes they were. and they certainly didn't bring farming to the Indus Valley who already had irrigation systems and fields ... No they didnt and yes there was. My understanding is there was already an 'agri-culture' there, also there was no 'invasion' and take over. Some even suggest they originated in 'India', migrated north, mixed in with others, became Aryan ( as the 'Out of India' people about that , aka 'The Indian Nationalist Party' ) ... or a sub group of the PIE, crossed back over the Hindu Kush (or were always there) maintained or created a connection with the 'Nations' (Of the Vendidad) and became know as "Hapta Hindu'' . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 15, 2016 (edited) @Nungali I formally challenge you to write about this subject without any block quotes from wikipedia. I demand satisfaction. *slaps cheek with glove then says ouch realising it's his own cheek*. ... coincidentally, this just in - yesterday ; https://www.sciencenews.org/article/two-groups-spread-early-agriculture?tgt=nr which goes some way to affirming some basic assumptions I made to develop my wacky ideas I ran it by a professional in the field and they affirmed that some findings in the area show evidence of my assumptions. Mine : Abstract We sequenced Early Neolithic genomes from the Zagros region of Iran (eastern Fertile Crescent), where some of the earliest evidence for farming is found, and identify a previously uncharacterized population that is neither ancestral to the first European farmers nor has contributed significantly to the ancestry of modern Europeans. These people are estimated to have separated from Early Neolithic farmers in Anatolia some 46-77,000 years ago and show affinities to modern day Pakistani and Afghan populations, but particularly to Iranian Zoroastrians. We conclude that multiple, genetically differentiated hunter-gatherer populations adopted farming in SW-Asia, that components of pre-Neolithic population structure were preserved as farming spread into neighboring regions, and that the Zagros region was the cradle of eastward expansion. ( from linked article) Nungers; " Of course they do ( ... one of my favorite subjects ! ) . They had a 'proto-Empire' across that whole region at a VERY early time . It wasnt until 'history' began, way after their 'civilisation' collapsed and they somewhat 'devolved' socially, and began to infiltrate through the Zargos down into the southern planes where we first read historically of their existence , the proto Medes and Parsa , reported by the Assyrians. I think the Zargos may have formed a barrier that separated these peoples 'Empire' and their development and civilization from the further south Tigres and Euphrates rivers, flood plains and basin (although it appears part of their territory was the upper Tigres ). All our research re. first civilisation / farming /agriculture has been based on this area, the 'Vendid Nations' area pretty much missed out, only the north eastern bit has been looked into extensively, but not he western portions, until the 1970s ( Russia has done some research there ), but since then terrain and war makes it near impossible. & " Here is an alternative idea. 'Agriculture' started ( not, became well established ) much earlier than commonly thought. ( there is evidence of its beginnings here in Australia pre- white / Euro settlement .) and may have 'run alongside' or even been part of , hunter gatherer and nomadic communities. The early development of it in the Middle-East and Central Asia, in some instances may have developed under a different dynamic.; there was a lot of trade, and long-distance trade going on back then * the first settlements may have developed along and at the intersection of trade routes. One can make a living if one can somehow regulate or assist traders, This might have been a better option than a hunting and gathering nomadic life style ? * there is evidence of ochre, being mined by the Aboriginals here for thousands of years (up until 1950 ! ) at Wilgie Mia and transported as far as Arnhem Land http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-australia-oceania/wilgie-mia-ancient-mine-where-ochre-runs-red-kangaroo-blood-001425 Response : " Yep I got interested in the Zagros mountains about ten years ago and felt - based on the writings of others - that we would find some 'organized' cultures there. Here is a link to a village in Iran that is dated 10,000 BP Zawi Chemi Shanidar www.mnsu.edu... Zawi Chemi Shanidar is a unique archaeological site located in the Zagros Mountains by the Zab River of northern Iraq. Some anthropologists consider it to be pre-pottery Neolithic. It was inhabited between 10,000-9,000 B.C. This time period lies within both the Mesolithic era and the Neolithic era. The Mesolithic was known for Natufian Micro-flint blades. The beginnings of sea travel, early agriculture, and cave/wall paintings are also characteristics of the Mesolithic and of Zawi Chemi Shanidar. The Neolithic is known for “superior” agriculture, more trade and some of the earliest shrines. We see some of these characteristics within the Zawi Chemi Shanidar site as well. This shows that Zawi Chemi Shanidar cannot be placed exclusively into the Mesolithic or the Neolithic time period because it has characteristics of both. This particular site is likely to have been a seasonal village/campsite. It is considered seasonal because the inhabitants moved to where food was available on a seasonal basis. The people who inhabited the site were from the Karim Shahir Culture. This culture was seasonally nomadic, meaning they were nomadic and somewhat sedentary. The season determined whether they would be sedentary or nomadic. Again, these characteristics are from two different eras showing that Zawi Chemi Shanidar is Neolithic/Mesolithic. The Shanidarians lived in round or dome-like huts. These huts were approximately 13 feet in diameter. Some people believe that the inhabitants lived in subterranean houses, although the evidence for this type of house is somewhat scarce. They did have large storage pits dug into the ground, a characteristic of a more sedentary life-style. Their daily lives probably consisted of the normal hunter gatherer/sedentary tasks. The men hunted or herded animals. The archaeologists found primitive mills for grain or wheat. There is not much evidence for whether the grain or wheat was wild or cultivated. They also found larger grinding stones. The grinding activities was probably done by the women who also cared for the children. Furthermore, with the prevalence of large underground storage pits, larger querns, and grinding stones, it is assumed that the Shanidarians overused plants potentially affected the availability of these resource. This would further show that they could not inhabit Zawi Chemi Shanidar for extended periods. Along with grains in their diets, the people ate mostly wild game and sheep. There were a large number of young sheep bones found in the site. There are two possible explanations. Possibly, they were not killing the young sheep when hunting, rather they were taken back to Zawi Chemi Shanidar and herding them. Another interpretation is called “stock manipulation.” Some of the other artifacts found at Zawi Chemi Shanidar were a large number of beads, some made of copper. This does not mean that they could shape and mold copper, nor did they use copper for tools. There were also bird bone beads covered with intricate designs. This is interesting because this shows the beginning of decoration on the body with objects, not just paint. Along with the beads, there was obsidian found. This is not an indigenous rock, rather it is volcanic glass. The glass was believed to have come from the Lake Van area of Anatolia indicating contact via trade. Another interesting thing found at the site was a large round stone building. It is believed to have been a hut, probably for religious/ritualistic gatherings. There were 28 burials found at Zawi Chemi Shanidar. 26 of these burials had a stone platform incorporated in the burial site. " Apech asked ; " Anyway why are we discussing the late Bronze Age/Early Iron age when our Lord Lois opened a thread on Atlantis? " Isnt it obvious by now ? Nungali is tracking down the REAL origin of the Atlantis myth .... it was the Nations of the Vendidad 'collective' or 'Empire'. Now considering the origins of the 'proto-Greeks' (and even Greek affiliation with the early Achaemenids * and their connection in pre-history / mythology and other indicators ** .... The next step is to list the main points and ideas in the Atlantis myth and correlate them to the Vendidad, Shahnameh and Bundahishn stories main points and myths, cross-correlated to the geographical knowledge I gleaned in relation to the areas of settlement and updated with new archaeological and anthropological finds .... oh yeah, and how the story got to Egypt ... along the Lapis Lazuli trade route from the 'Aryan capitol' (country number 1, Airyana Vaja - up in the mountainous valleys of eastern 'Bactria' ) ... I am guessing . - Man ! This book is gonna outsell Duval and Handcock ! * https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Iranian_History/The_Medes_and_the_Early_Achaemenids ** http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/olympicflame/page2.htm & http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/achaemenian/darius2.htm#greekallies Edited July 15, 2016 by Nungali Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted July 20, 2016 @Nungali Write that book, then the TV series ... then when your career begins to dip go on reality TV or become a guest on a comedy panel quiz show ... On the subject of the beginnings of agriculture - I think its well established that pastoralists do limited farming to promote certain grasses and other plants which are used for feed for cattle. The other interesting observation I read in the great Romila Thapar's Penguin History of Early India was that there was a symbiotic relationship between farmers and pastoralists. In that the pastoralists would drive their herds to the fields after harvest to eat the stubble which would in turn fertilise the fields through manure. So it is easy to conceive of a time when some of the population were still nomadic and others settled. It doesn't have to be, and surely wasn't a drastic sudden change from one life style to another. The other point I think you have to establish to fulfil the 'Atlantis' requirement is sudden destruction through cataclysmic disaster. Can you build that in somehow? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) @Nungali Write that book, then the TV series ... then when your career begins to dip go on reality TV or become a guest on a comedy panel quiz show ... yes ... like Carl Sagan said; 'The Universe is full of endless potential and energy ... to make long winded tv series about . On the subject of the beginnings of agriculture - I think its well established that pastoralists do limited farming to promote certain grasses and other plants which are used for feed for cattle. The other interesting observation I read in the great Romila Thapar's Penguin History of Early India was that there was a symbiotic relationship between farmers and pastoralists. In that the pastoralists would drive their herds to the fields after harvest to eat the stubble which would in turn fertilise the fields through manure. So it is easy to conceive of a time when some of the population were still nomadic and others settled. It doesn't have to be, and surely wasn't a drastic sudden change from one life style to another. The "New Hampshire Hills" area (so named by the English) - an area of grassland in the middle of the Tasmanian rain forest. At first considered natural, although out of place and unusual. It was made and used for thousands of years as kangaroo pasture for hunting ... why bother trekking, bring them to you by establishing a food source. Euros put sheep on it ... it was stuffed within 20 years . We still do the stubble feed / manure thing here . I added a bit more to it .... its actually basic common sense ( the most uncommon of human traits nowadays ) . The other point I think you have to establish to fulfil the 'Atlantis' requirement is sudden destruction through cataclysmic disaster. Can you build that in somehow? As long as it isnt too sudden ... how 'sudden' was Atlantis' supposed demise ... I thought they had warning ? (or was that Krypton ? ) Here is the scenario; in an arc from the NE of Iran from the Kopet-Dag Mts and down into the Kara-kum desert , to the east through Afghanistan / Turkmenistan , around to the north east skirting the Oxus valley and headwaters , up to the Pamirs and western Kunlun mountains there is a vast network of valleys and rivers going down into (now) drier lands that held delta settlements (some .deltas fanning out into desert - like modern day Hotan on the silk route ) . These lands are full of ancient ruins that have been little explored. First , there was a big chill (the early part of their history ) then a thaw , this fed a lot of the drainage basin and the rivers and deltas where the settlements where Gonur north Gonur south Then , I am imagining the 'broken ice dams' scenarios, creating massive downstream floods - I did have one image with ruins as above, a whole half of them are wiped out with a giant dry river channel running through it, there is an older river channel nearby and one can see how it changed course and wiped out the settlement - but damned if I can find that pic or the name of the place now . When one looks at the land form of the whole Oxus basin, this could have happened in many places. After this drought began to set in or was already beginning (,,,, to be continued - visitors ) Edited July 21, 2016 by Nungali 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) ... The ground plan is in a circular pattern with concentric rings . It may have not 'sunk beneath the waves' but the waters and waves covered it at some stage. Then I would need to bring in some interesting character who had wacky ideas in the past about it .... and to explain why it has not been 'realized' before ... a type of Flinders Petrie character ( including some rather amazing artifacts from the area /era ) Enter Raphael Pumpelly (1837 - 1923 ) [ okay the above is all off the top of my head ... I hope you can now excuse a bit of cut and paste - except the pics and maps ] " More than a century ago an unlikely geologist from New York put forth a proposition that "the fundamentals of civilization - organized village life, agriculture, the domestication of animals, weaving," (including mining and metal work) "originated in the oases of Central Asia long before the time of Babylon." [/size]Raphael Pumpelly arrived at this conclusion after visiting Central Asia as a geologist and observing the ruins of cities on the ancient shorelines of huge, dried inland seas. By studying the geology of the area, he became one of the first individuals to investigate how environmental conditions could influence human settlement and culture. Pumpelly speculated that a large inland sea in central Asia might have once supported a sizeable population. He knew from his travels and study that the climate in Central Asia had become drier and drier since the time of the last ice age. As the sea began to shrink, it could have forced these people to move west, bringing civilization to westward and to the rest of the world. He hypothesized that the ruins of cities he saw were evidence of a great ancient civilization that existed when Central Asia was more wet and fertile than it is now. [/size]Such assertions that civilization as we know it originated in Central Asia sounded radical at a time when the names of Egypt and Babylon, regions connected to the Bible, were considered to be the cradle of civilization. But Raphael Pumpelly was persistent. Forty years after his first trip to Central Asia, he convinced the newly established Andrew Carnegie Foundation to fund an expedition. Since the Russians controlled Central Asia, he charmed the authorities in Saint Petersburg into granting him permission for an archaeological excavation. The latter even provided Pumpelly with a private railcar. At the age of 65, Pumpelly was given the opportunity to prove his theory and he wasted no time in starting his work.[/size] ( and more [/size]http://www.heritageinstitute.com/zoroastrianism/nisa/anau.htm#pumpelly ) Then jazz it up with another more recent one ... enter Viktor Sarianidi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Sarianidi and find obscure academic references ; " University of Chicago's page on Archaeology and Language, The Indo-Iranians by C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky: "This review of recent archaeological work in Central Asia and Eurasia attempts to trace and date the movements of the Indo-Iranians—speakers of languages of the eastern branch of Proto-Indo-European that later split into the Iranian and Vedic families. Russian and Central Asian scholars working on the contemporary but very different Andronovo and Bactrian Margiana archaeological complexes of the 2d millennium BCE have identified both as Indo-Iranian, and particular sites so identified are being used for nationalist purposes. There is, however, no compelling archaeological evidence that they had a common ancestor or that either is Indo-Iranian. Ethnicity and language are not easily linked with an archaeological signature, and the identity of the Indo-Iranians remains elusive." and bamboozle people with their qualifications ; ["C. C. Lamberg-Karlovsky is Stephen Philips Professor of Archaeology in the Department of Anthropology at Harvard University and Curator of Near Eastern Archaeology at Harvard's Peabody Museum (Cambridge, Mass. 02138, U.S.A.). Born in 1937, he was educated at Dartmouth College (B.A., 1959) and the University of Pennsylvania (M.A., 1964; Ph.D., 1965). His research interests concern the nature of the interaction between the Bronze Age civilizations of the Near East and their contemporary neighbors of the Iranian Plateau, the Indus Valley, the Arabian Peninsula, and Central Asia. His recent publications include Beyond the Tigris and Euphrates Bronze Age Civilizations (Tel Aviv: Ben Gurion University of the Negev Press, 1996) and (with Daniel Potts et al.) Excavations at Tepe Yahya, Iran: Third Millennium (American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 42)."] then tie it all together along with how the story got to Egypt by ..... Oooooo , let's see ...... travelling along the Lapis lazuli trade route from Bactria to Egypt . Edited July 21, 2016 by Nungali 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) ... and as a secondary ref. Fredrik Hiebert, an archaeologist with the National Geographic Society and formerly a professor of anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania, who conducted a 1988 dig in the Kara Kum Desert, says that one of the reasons why Pumpelly has been ignored by other archaeologists was their need to defend established theories and resulting bias. In 1904, Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Mediterranean were the accepted great centres of civilization. "So why in the world would Pumpelly have gone to Turkmenistan to look for civilization? To his peers, it made no sense; people couldn't comprehend it." (so I can throw in a bit of 'mild conspiracy' there ... I certainly could not leave THAT out of the book Hiebert returned to Turkmenistan in 1993 following Turkmenistan's independence from Russia, this time choosing to work at Anau in collaboration with a Turkmen colleague, Dr. Murad Kurbansakhatov. In 1996, digging in the same kurgan (or tepe / depe meaning mound) Pumpelly had dug in 1904, Hiebert notes: "We dug further down than Pumpelly had been able to do, and what we found was a confirmation of everything he believed." There was early evidence of civilization in the form of farming - specifically, tiny grains of white wheat, proof, says Hiebert, that the Turkmen people were engaged in agricultural production as early as 6,500 years ago. Hiebert's wife, a zoo-archaeologist (who joined the dig just as Pumpelly's wife Eliza had 95 years earlier), discovered bones of domesticated animals. "So here we were, almost 100 years after Raphael Pumpelly had been here, confirming that he was right." There is a LOT of sand out there ... you never know what you find until you scrape it away Edited July 21, 2016 by Nungali 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Enishi Posted July 21, 2016 (edited) Interesting discussion! Something about the idea of Atlantis has always deeply resonated with me. I've read numerous theories with varying measures of interest, but due to my INTP nature that is always doubting and looking for a greater comprehensive perspective, I've been on the fence and thought the various locations postulated were always flawed to some degree. I can definitely swallow the idea though that areas in Central Asia might have collapsed over time due to melting glaciers, or plain old deforestation and desalination as happens with most pre-industrial civilizations. As for all the other ideas about Atlantis having advanced technology or magic powers, there's nothing concrete to suggest that, and there's no cover up either as I have seen suggested by some. Yes conspiracies and cover ups do happen, but there's not really enough money in archaeological research to justify it, and you can't exactly classify and hide ruins or historical sites. Edited July 21, 2016 by Enishi Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 21, 2016 Nearly every lost, deserted, evacuated, city/ civilization I have looked into seems to have been because of (aside from war ) climate change and lack of water. You haven't got water .... you have to leave real quick. No one is going to delver pallet loads of bottled water to you back then. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted August 9, 2016 Well, some time has passed as I wait patiently for more info to surface re the Kicher ' Atlantis' map . ? meanwhile, this just came in to the newsroom : One may wonder whether Kircher acquired his design of the continent from an ancient source map. This would depend on how loosely you define ancient, as the design appears to have been borrowed from maps of the South American continent being produced just a few decades earlier. The overall shape of the continent is virtually identical to South America's depiction on the 1592 Typus Orbis Terrarum by Abraham Ortelius (Fig. 2). Both maps correctly depict a recessed southeastern coastline interrupted by the Rio de la Plata, but both also present erroneous depictions of a perfectly straight and slanting western coastline as well as a blunt west to east rising southern tip. Kircher's Atlantis even precisely mimics the directly southward pointing orientation found on Ortelius' version of South America as opposed to South America's actual southwesterly orientation. Figure 2 - 1592 Typus Orbis Terrarum by Abraham Ortelius (left), which shares an uncanny likeness with Kircher’s Atlantis (right, reoriented with north toward the top). They correctly depict a recessed southeastern coastline interrupted by the Rio de la Plata (E,F), but both also present erroneous depictions of a straight western coastline © as well as a blunt west to east rising southern tip (D). Both also depict an almost identical transition to a double scalloped coast in the northwest (A - B ) . "We might be tempted to entertain the possibility that Kircher's map was based on an ancient map of South America, while Ortelius and other cartographers of his time were also generating some maps of South America partially based on ancient maps of the continent. After all, we already confirmed that at least one 16th century cartographer used similar methods in generating maps of the Antarctic continent. There is, however, no clear evidence to substantiate that ancient maps of Atlantis were in existence. To even be a legitimate consideration, the South American design would have had to appear on maps charted near or before 1492, in order to negate contemporary exploration as the true source and inspiration of the design. And in fact it seems very possible that Kircher's rendering of the continent of Atlantis may have been the result of a prank. Kircher was renowned for being "highly susceptible to suggestion" and was subsequently subjected to several pranks. In one notable prank, Kircher, having convinced himself he could read Hieroglyphics, was sent a forged Egyptian manuscript which he 'successfully' translated while never suspecting it was nothing more than gibberish. (Athanasius Kircher by Paula Findlen, pp. 7) Kircher fancied himself an expert Egyptologist and it appears this may have made him an easy mark for a forged Egyptian map of Atlantis. American politician Ignatius L. Donnelly, another Atlantis theorists sharing the view of a submerged Atlantis in the Atlantic, also includes a map (Fig. 3) in his 1882 book, Atlantis: The Antediluvian World. Interestingly, Donnelly's Atlantis continent like Kircher's also bears a similar resemblance to South America, but Donnelly relocates the continent nearer the Strait of Gibraltar to buoy his theory that the Azores Islands were the tops of mountain peaks; the only remaining portion of Atlantis rising above the surface of the Atlantic. " Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted August 9, 2016 @Nungali - where's the Olympic Stadium? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted August 9, 2016 Interesting. I recall in the back of my brain reading or hearing about the existence of a map depicting the American continents that existed prior to Columbus' sailing. In my mind it is associated with a supposed Italian named Americus Vaspucius or something like that. And this is why the continents got the name America. That map or one similar may have been the one that was being spoken of but I don't recall it being associated with Atlantis in any way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted August 9, 2016 I have seen one that looks like the Sth American continent is 'broken off', smaller and to the north east. The 'West Indies' are drawn bigger in proportion and appear as large islands between the 'strange south island' and the 'main land' . There are all sorts of versions But no, none may have been associated with Atlantis at all .... until some one pranked Kircher .. hey Marbles ... wanna buy an old map with directions to Lasseter's reef .... its solid gold ! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasseter%27s_Reef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
