Hyksos, Habiru, and the Hebrews

[SlimJim22]

Re: Gene Matlock - Pseudo would be kind! Degrees in Spanish. Proposes that the North Pole was the Garden of Eden. Page deleted from Wiki (2008, listed as pseudo-historian). Claims pre-contact connections between Hindus and Mexicans, etc. Yoiks!

http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Gene_Matlock_%28deleted_24_Feb_2008_at_04:55%29

http://www.viewzone.com/hinduturk.html

.

I see what you mean "Names of Street Fighter II characters as evidence of memory of Atlantis" sounds a bit cuckoo. Hardly an authority on ancient religion with a degree in spanish, still to give the guy a break he puts together lingual connections and then writes fantastical books. Everyone needs to make dough and it's not to everyones tastes it doesn't mean that all the ingredients he uses could not bake a better cake, if you get my rather poor analogy.

I had noticed a great deal of phonetic lingual connections independently myself such as Asshur, Aesir, Asuras or the whole thing with the Sidhe. There are many more so can you give your opinion Swede on whether ANY connections like this have any credibility in academia or is it something strongly rejected and left to the fringe writers? I know from what others have told me that academics would not use something so simplistic but can you tell me why it is so strongly denied? Cheers

[questionmark]

Re: Gene Matlock - Pseudo would be kind! Degrees in Spanish. Proposes that the North Pole was the Garden of Eden. Page deleted from Wiki (2008, listed as pseudo-historian). Claims pre-contact connections between Hindus and Mexicans, etc. Yoiks!

http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Gene_Matlock_%28deleted_24_Feb_2008_at_04:55%29

http://www.viewzone.com/hinduturk.html

.

nice that it was not me to identify a card holder this time...

[SlimJim22]

I was looking at a map of the near east and struggling to understand a cross cultural connection between Armenia and India them being so far away from one another. However, I just read that the Oxus river once flowed into the Caspian Sea rather than the Aral. Could this provide a more efficient means of travel?

Also, anyone heard of Ur Jahuda in Bactria (Northern Afghanastan)? Could this what was meant by Abraham of Ur of the Chaldeans and not the Ur of Iraq?

http://www.afghan-network.net/Culture/old_balkh.html

[Swede]

I see what you mean "Names of Street Fighter II characters as evidence of memory of Atlantis" sounds a bit cuckoo. Hardly an authority on ancient religion with a degree in spanish, still to give the guy a break he puts together lingual connections and then writes fantastical books. Everyone needs to make dough and it's not to everyones tastes it doesn't mean that all the ingredients he uses could not bake a better cake, if you get my rather poor analogy.

I had noticed a great deal of phonetic lingual connections independently myself such as Asshur, Aesir, Asuras or the whole thing with the Sidhe. There are many more so can you give your opinion Swede on whether ANY connections like this have any credibility in academia or is it something strongly rejected and left to the fringe writers? I know from what others have told me that academics would not use something so simplistic but can you tell me why it is so strongly denied? Cheers

Linguistics is not one of my specialties, so I don't feel fully qualified to answer your question except in rather general terms. Linguistics is a valid field of study, and one that is most complex to those not well trained in the topic. This is "problem" #1. It takes serious training and study to be even a competent linguist. Contributors such as kmt-sesh and Searcher (amongst others) can validate this point. Problem #2 lies in the rather limited range of consonant/vowel sounds within the human vocal repertoire. Setting aside some of the language forms that use such vocalizations as glottals, clicks, and whistles (a fascinating study in themselves), there is wide room for overlap in syllabic enunciations. As an example, the base utterances of infants from widely separated cultures can be surprisingly similar. Ba-ba and ma-ma are childhood Ojibwe (Algonquin language group) for father and mother. Sound familiar?

Another (major) problem involves those who would associate phonetic connections across cultural, geographic or temporal frames that are not supported by any other evidence. This is where archaeology comes in. Words do not travel by themselves.

Lastly, linguistics, as valuable as they may be, are not considered to be as "hard" a form of supporting evidence as other fields of study. The ongoing malleability of language is a factor here, as is the more precise dating that is available from other fields of research.

Then one can get into the true complexities of linguistics. Syntax, semantics, etymology, etc.

As a brief (and, again, general) summary, the application of linguistic study is a worthy pursuit, but it needs to be rigorously studied and contextually applied. This is where fringe writers would appear to be lacking.

The below may be of interest;

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/language.html

http://www.danshort.com/ie/

And even;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistics

Hope this is of assistance.

.

[Swede]

nice that it was not me to identify a card holder this time...

Chuckle! Reckon its not fair for you to do all the heavy lifting and I finely had a few unbooked hours!

.

.

[SlimJim22]

Some new information I had not come across previously, don't know what to make of it or if it has been discussed already.

Malamat places the date of a "punctual exodus," the culmination of a "durative event, toward the end of the XIXth Dynasty ...." It was then that the two dominant forces in the area, the empires of Egypt and the Hittites, collapsed, leaving a power vacuum in Palestine. According to a royal stele on the island of Elephantine "from the second (?) year of Pharaoh Sethnakht, founder of the XXth Dynasty ..., dating in absolute chronology from the first or second decade of the 12th century B.C.E. ..., the political situation in Egypt ... was marred by the enigmatic intervention of Asiatics ... who were approached and bribed by a faction of Egyptians ... who revolted against another faction ... who remained loyal to Sethnakht." Sethnakht overcame the plot and drove the Asiatics from Egypt. According to Malamat, the Papyrus Harris I also describes "the Syrian-Palestinian usurpation of Egypt" as well as the "desolate conditions" that held sway prior to Ramses III. According to the papyrus, the Asiatics were led by "someone called Irsa," and Malamat goes on to note that some scholars identify Irsa with Beya.

There is a strong resemblance between the items offered as bribes by the rebels to the Palestinians and the items described in Exodus taken by the Israelites from the Egyptians: "And it shall come to pass, that, when ye go, ye shall not go empty; but every woman shall ask of her neighbor, and of her that sojourneth in her house, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment; and ye shall put them upon your sons, and upon your daughters; and ye shall spoil the Egyptians."

Finally, Malamat notes that "there are now a few scholars who boldly maintain that Beya/Irsu is in fact the biblical Moses ...." Thus, what had been an informed supposition on my part now rose to the level of legitimate hypothesis supported by an academic expert in the field, Johannes C. De Moor in The Rise of Yahwism: The Roots of Israelite Monotheism.

De Moor places the Exodus at the end of the 19th Dynasty, at 1190 BC, based on extensive though circumstantial evidence. This is close to the date we have already arrived at using purely chronological methods. Others place the collapse of the Hittite Empire and the fall of Ugarit to the Sea People at 1185. In de Moor's estimation, the pharaoh of the Exodus was Setnakhte, who drove Miriam, Moses, and their friends, family, and allies out of Egypt after their failure to buy help from the Canaanites in imitation of Osarsiph and the Hyksos. He further mentions the older brother of Siptah, who died before his father, as a candidate for the son of the pharaoh who fell victim to the tenth plague. In this regard he agrees with Malamat in recognizing the telescoping effect we noted earlier, though, according to J.C. de Moor, the city of Pithom (Tell el-Ratabeh) was probably built by Merneptah, who continued work on the city of Raamses (Pi-Ramesse) as well, so that the incidents described in the bible may not be so terribly compressed as they would at first appear, and the killing of the overseer would have involved the very construction at these two cities and not a later event. It was here, at Pi-Ramesse, that he suggests that Moses/Beya met Setnakhte, whom he calls Sethnakht, when he was still a prince. The latter had a house near the palace and worshipped at the temple of Sutekh/Seth/Baal, a deity earlier associated with the Hyksos whom Manetho calls "Typhon."

http://neros.lordbalto.com/ChapterThree.htm

[Sir_Quack_The_Wack]

I don't know.

I don't care.

All I know is that the LORD took his people out of bondage in Egypt, and it was I Am Who I Am that sent the GREAT Prophet Moses to do this thing, with his brother Aaron and all of Jah's power in his staff.

This is in The Bible. I KNOW it happened. No amount of argument will tear that away from me and oceans of people worldwide.

If something is in a science journal or some little magazine for nerds, everyone believes it, no matter how ridiculous and if there is no proof elsewhere. Because they trust the source.

Same thing here.

Who the Hebrews were, and why there is no record of this great event is a mystery for a reason. A mystery. And it will always be a mystery. And so it should be.

[kmt_sesh]

I don't know.

I don't care.

All I know is that the LORD took his people out of bondage in Egypt, and it was I Am Who I Am that sent the GREAT Prophet Moses to do this thing, with his brother Aaron and all of Jah's power in his staff.

This is in The Bible. I KNOW it happened. No amount of argument will tear that away from me and oceans of people worldwide.

If something is in a science journal or some little magazine for nerds, everyone believes it, no matter how ridiculous and if there is no proof elsewhere. Because they trust the source.

Same thing here.

Who the Hebrews were, and why there is no record of this great event is a mystery for a reason. A mystery. And it will always be a mystery. And so it should be.

The part I bolded is representative of the endemic problem fostered by fundamentalists of all religious breeds, as are statements such as "I don't know" and "I don't care": it is the way it is, the Bible says so, so let's not look any deeper. This might be a manifestation of devout faith, but unfortunately it's also intellectual sloth.

We were born with keen minds and are meant to exercise them. Most people of faith do not limit themselves so painfully: many among the Catholic clergy, for example, constitute some of the best-educated and most adroit historians in the world.

Those "little magazine for nerds" are for the most part based on hard science. They teach us the realities of ancient history. The Bible was never meant as a history book, nor should it be regarded as such. It's decidedly odd that if we are meant to regard the Bible as the literal word of God, then why has it been edited, revised, expanded, and redacted so extensively through the centuries? Indeed, were the average Catholic to take a hard look at much of Christianity in its earliest forms as practiced throughout the Near East, I can guarantee you he or she would have a hard time recognizing it as Catholicism.

So poke fun at science if you want, Sir_Quack_The_Wack, but the unbending truth is, science has demonstrated repeatedly over the last couple of centuries how inaccurate the Bible tends to be. That's not surprising, given the fact that the Hebraic scribes who first penned the words of the Old Testament were not viewing it as a work of history in any sense of the word we might recognize.

[kmt_sesh]

I should add that the nature of my last post, in response to Sir_Quack_The_Wack, might make me seem like an atheist. I am not. I should further emphasize that Sir_Quack_The_Wack's post does not address anything of substance in my OP. I am certainly not denying the existence of the Hebrews or the importance they have had on the course of history down to modern times, nor am I belittling religion, though it might seem that way. I am merely striking the necessary balance that is required by a secular and logical approach to proper historical inquiry.

[Sir_Quack_The_Wack]

I am not a Christian fundamentalist. I'm anything but. I do not believe the world is six thousand years old. I do not believe in a magical garden and talking snakes etc.

I do not even believe in the popular thoughts of God. I am a Pantheist with a faith in Scripture, no matter what they are based from or their intention.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make in my post. It happened all right. But not in this system, nor in this system's boundaries. With the evolution of the human mind and the current almost unnatural state of sophistication, everything has seemed to change along with it. Now what were once facts are laughed at by many, but the thing is, those things are still facts in the past. And so these things did happen in the past.

Most people are showing a very low perception of real and unreal BY this same perception bloating into something terrible. Look how everything in the world, hell, this galaxy is getting more and more hectic? So many of us are depressed and highly pessimistic because of what is there. But these things have also curiously taken place as the human society has grown more and more hectic. So while it is obvious everything is getting worse, our very lives seem to be following(or is it leading?) this path.

In a time when all it was people wrote about and recorded was wondrous things and fantastic miracles, following the whole message of this post of mine, we can see that Moses leading the Hebrews through the Red Sea is probably based in truth just as much as the earthquakes sadly making the headlines too often this past year.

Yes, I am highly eccentric. I'm probably very weird to many people. But I'M not weird, the things I am discovering are what's weird. The world's weird, amirite?

[danielost]

you guys keep talking about there being no mention of 144,000 people who just beat the egyptian army, then the military power of the world(what we would call a super power), do you think that the usa would put into history books about the tribe of indians who was lead by a man named joseph who out witted the entire us army and escaped to canada. well do you.

by the way this really happened.

http://www.globalchristians.org/politics/DOCS/I%20Will%20Fight%20No%20More%20Forever.pdf

[SlimJim22]

I am not a Christian fundamentalist. I'm anything but. I do not believe the world is six thousand years old. I do not believe in a magical garden and talking snakes etc.

I do not even believe in the popular thoughts of God. I am a Pantheist with a faith in Scripture, no matter what they are based from or their intention.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make in my post. It happened all right. But not in this system, nor in this system's boundaries. With the evolution of the human mind and the current almost unnatural state of sophistication, everything has seemed to change along with it. Now what were once facts are laughed at by many, but the thing is, those things are still facts in the past. And so these things did happen in the past.

Most people are showing a very low perception of real and unreal BY this same perception bloating into something terrible. Look how everything in the world, hell, this galaxy is getting more and more hectic? So many of us are depressed and highly pessimistic because of what is there. But these things have also curiously taken place as the human society has grown more and more hectic. So while it is obvious everything is getting worse, our very lives seem to be following(or is it leading?) this path.

In a time when all it was people wrote about and recorded was wondrous things and fantastic miracles, following the whole message of this post of mine, we can see that Moses leading the Hebrews through the Red Sea is probably based in truth just as much as the earthquakes sadly making the headlines too often this past year.

Yes, I am highly eccentric. I'm probably very weird to many people. But I'M not weird, the things I am discovering are what's weird. The world's weird, amirite?

Being a little wierd is no bad thing. Fostering indivualism over conformity is prefferal imo but there is no doubt the impact that Abraham and the other patriarchs have had on mankind.

Simply put I think the lessons taught by the OT are reject human sacrifice, NT upgrading this to all sacrifice. Also, do not worship idols rather worship nature and the almight One. Anything more complex than that seems to be open to interpretation for example what or who is the One?

As Timothy Leary once said "the Universe is an intelligent test." Not a test of intelligence, this goes beyond logic and reason because each can be deceived. History is one such way to deceive, as you point out the Egyptians would not write about them getting a whooping from the hebrews. Personally, I am unsure how much of the OT to take literally but I try and see whether the stories have an allegorical message as much as a historical and spiritual one. Suffice to say I find evidence of at least one secret tradition that has survived. I say evidence but it is far more speculative than that, I may be seeing what I want to see. However, from reading some of the apocrypha like Jasher, Enoch and Jubilees, there is an enemy of the followers of JA. That being Nimrod, who seems to be the embodiment of negative human qualities like greed, arrogance, lust, etc with the followers of JA being in touch with spirit and following principles of a higher nature. For me the original hebrews would be closer to indigenous peoples than how they are made out from history, living a modest life that looks for transendance beyond the material. The Essenes being a good example of a group focussed on material purity for spiritual union.

You mention Aaron. I was only thinking yesterday the important of this name. I know I gave up lingual connections but I can't help noticing that it is a combination of Ari (Uri) and On as in Aunu. This is also the form of the word Orion, which is suggested as an important constellation in mystery traditions. Just remember that secret socieites and mystery schools

attempt to remain nothing more than a legend so it is not surprising that we don'd find them mentioned in texts, unless they wanted to be that is but even then the evidence could have been destroyed at a later date.

[questionmark]

In a time when all it was people wrote about and recorded was wondrous things and fantastic miracles, following the whole message of this post of mine, we can see that Moses leading the Hebrews through the Red Sea is probably based in truth just as much as the earthquakes sadly making the headlines too often this past year.

All myths, no matter if Goldilocks, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs or Paul Bunion are based on real events. That does not mean that it happened the way the story is told.

[questionmark]

you guys keep talking about there being no mention of 144,000 people who just beat the egyptian army, then the military power of the world(what we would call a super power), do you think that the usa would put into history books about the tribe of indians who was lead by a man named joseph who out witted the entire us army and escaped to canada. well do you.

by the way this really happened.

http://www.globalchristians.org/politics/DOCS/I%20Will%20Fight%20No%20More%20Forever.pdf

well, with .5% of the world's population at my command I'd beat any superpower too I just would let them trample over them. That figure is totally inverosimil as the whole population of the world in 2000 BCE did not exceed 27 million people.

Edited July 1, 2010 by questionmark

[danielost]

well, with .5% of the world's population at my command I'd beat any superpower too I just would let them trample over them. That figure is totally inverosimil as the whole population of the world in 2000 BCE did not exceed 27 million people.

that isnt the point is it. you had 144,000 clay makers defeat without fighting the largest and best trained army of the time. i forgot and the best equiped.

[cormac mac airt]

you guys keep talking about there being no mention of 144,000 people who just beat the egyptian army, then the military power of the world(what we would call a super power), do you think that the usa would put into history books about the tribe of indians who was lead by a man named joseph who out witted the entire us army and escaped to canada. well do you.

Sadly there is no archaeological evidence to corroborate the first part (which sounds much like a Christian Apologetics viewpoint) and as to the second part, YES. I read about Chief Joseph and the Nez Perce in grade school, decades ago. It's not exactly a deep, dark secret.

cormac

[ShadowSot]

I apologize for my misrepresentation Mr. Brier, and stand dutifully corrected.

Now pursuing my education on history with more earnest I'm finding myself a little bit over whelmed.

[kmt_sesh]

that isnt the point is it. you had 144,000 clay makers defeat without fighting the largest and best trained army of the time. i forgot and the best equiped.

Your number is quite low, and in fact the number as recorded in Exodus 12:37 suggests something completely unrealistic:

The Israelites journeyed from Rameses to Succoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children.

Now, that's just 600,000 men, not including the women and children. This easily brings the total number of Hebrew slaves in Egypt over and above one million people. At no point in pharaonic history were there that many slaves in Egypt at any one time. Slavery was definitely part of Egyptian culture from the very beginning, but this number in Exodus simply doesn't float. The average biblical scholar nowadays argues that the pharaoh of the Exodus was Ramesses II, and we can safely estimate that the total population of Egypt in his time was around 3 million people. It depends how you want to look at the figure, but given the figure in Exodus we can say the Hebrew slaves alone comprised one-third of the population. Not at all realistic.

This is why some scholars try to tweak the facts and suggest that perhaps the figure in Exodus is exaggerated, which is certainly possible. Maybe it wasn't 600,000 men but 6,000 or even 600. This is considerably more realistic, but it's kind of a pet peeve of mine because such scholars are taking liberties with the one and only source that preserves any mention of the Exodus: the Old Testament itself. This would logically compel one to demand: "Well, is the primary source, the Book of Exodus, reliable or unreliable?" And again we're brought back to the fact that the very historicity of the Bible is in question. Whatever way you look at it, the argument in favor of historicity is invariably a dead-end.

We can also look at this in more strictly historical terms, based on facts we know are invulnerable to attack. We are told in 1 Kings 6:1:

In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the LORD.

The fourth year of Solomon's reign would historically be placed in 966 BCE (putting aside the fact for now that there is no evidence for Solomon outside the Old Testament, either). If the Exodus took place 480 years prior to the building of the first temple in Jerusalem, we can date the Exodus itself to 1446 BCE. The problem with this scenario is that the pharaoh of Egypt at this time was none other than Tuthmosis III (1479-1424 BCE), the greatest warrior-king in pharaonic history. At this time, near the middle of Dynasty 18, Egypt solidly ruled every place and every person from Nubia to Syria. This was the pinnacle of Egyptian military might. There were no outsiders (Hebrews) who had fled Egypt and were conquering the Levant because the Egyptians controlled this entire region. And this is despite the fact that we can confidently say the Hebrews as a people and culture did not yet exist.

For a number of reasons, like I mentioned, most scholars favor Ramesses II (1279-1212 BCE) as the pharaoh of the Exodus. It can be argued within reason that the Hebrews were just starting to emerge as a nomadic people. It's also true that as successful as Ramesses II was in his 67 years on the throne, the splendor of Egypt was just starting to wane. Under Ramesses II Egypt lost a lot of the territory in the Levant that it had controlled under Tuthmosis III some 145 years earlier. But we're back to the same problem about the political climate in the Levant and Syria. The powerful empire of the Hittites controlled the entire northern area of this region while Egypt maintained its hegemony of the southern area. There simply were no outsiders (Hebrews) who had fled Egypt and were conquering the Levant.

The more we apply a strictly historical view of the Exodus based on the realities of the time and place when it was supposed to have happened, the less realistic the story becomes.

[kmt_sesh]

I apologize for my misrepresentation Mr. Brier, and stand dutifully corrected.

Now pursuing my education on history with more earnest I'm finding myself a little bit over whelmed.

Don't worry about it, ShadowSot. I think you and I might have some of the same problems with Dr. Brier. Quite a few people I work with at a couple of Chicago museums don't like him because he's too much of a cheerleader or poster-boy for ancient Egypt. I am more tolerant, I suppose. I think he's a wonderful lecturer and a gifted writer, and he does good work. One just must remain aware of where Brier steps beyond the bounds of his own expertise.

As for the other thing, make sure you don't go at it too hard. After all, we wouldn't want you to wear yourself out or you might end up closely resembling that, um, interesting photo in your avatar.

[kmt_sesh]

...

You mention Aaron. I was only thinking yesterday the important of this name. I know I gave up lingual connections but I can't help noticing that it is a combination of Ari (Uri) and On as in Aunu. This is also the form of the word Orion, which is suggested as an important constellation in mystery traditions. Just remember that secret socieites and mystery schools

Now, Slim, you're playing fast and loose with linguistics again. Bad boy! You do realize, don't you, that Aaron is simply an anglicized version of the original Hebrew name? In Hebrew it's more like Aharon (pronounced like Ah-hay-rōn). Both "On" and "Aunu" are somewhat clumsy renderings of the Egyptian cult center of Iunu (pronounced like Ee-oo-new), called Heliopolis by the Greeks. Iunu is the best we modern folks can do to reproduce something of how the word may have sounded, absent the vowels (in English rendering "Iunu" seems loaded with vowels, but in the glyphs none of the vowels are actually preserved, the nature of which I needn't bog us down with). The Hebrew name Aharon (Aaron) has nothing to do with the Egyptian Iunu, to be sure. Why would it? It has its own meaning in Hebrew: enlightened or exulted.

I'm also not sure what the Greek constellation of Orion would have to do with the solar-cult center of Iunu or with the brother of Moses.

[danielost]

Sadly there is no archaeological evidence to corroborate the first part (which sounds much like a Christian Apologetics viewpoint) and as to the second part, YES. I read about Chief Joseph and the Nez Perce in grade school, decades ago. It's not exactly a deep, dark secret.

cormac

you read about it in history class because america is an open society. in a closed society, like russia the winners of world war 2.

[SlimJim22]

Now, Slim, you're playing fast and loose with linguistics again. Bad boy! You do realize, don't you, that Aaron is simply an anglicized version of the original Hebrew name? In Hebrew it's more like Aharon (pronounced like Ah-hay-rōn). Both "On" and "Aunu" are somewhat clumsy renderings of the Egyptian cult center of Iunu (pronounced like Ee-oo-new), called Heliopolis by the Greeks. Iunu is the best we modern folks can do to reproduce something of how the word may have sounded, absent the vowels (in English rendering "Iunu" seems loaded with vowels, but in the glyphs none of the vowels are actually preserved, the nature of which I needn't bog us down with). The Hebrew name Aharon (Aaron) has nothing to do with the Egyptian Iunu, to be sure. Why would it? It has its own meaning in Hebrew: enlightened or exulted.

I'm also not sure what the Greek constellation of Orion would have to do with the solar-cult center of Iunu or with the brother of Moses.

It is imperative that I make the mistakes in order to learn. I always learn a great deal from you and Cormac et al. Fast and loose is my style and it's too late in the day to change it now.

So, Heliopolis was a solar cult of Iunu. I was about to mention the Moon then noticed it was an 'I' and not an 'L'. Sratch that one but Heliopolis is important for Stechini's grid theories but I met a bit of a brick wall with them tbh.

You say Aaron means exalted or enlightened and is pronounced Aharon. Any possible link to Aha? I doubt it but I gotta try.

As for Orion, the debate over Giza refelcting Orion's belt is still open so any connection to Heliopolis would come through a connection with Giza. Poor reasoning admittedly but Orion within the occult is a most puzzling subject. In greek myth Orion is the giant hunter who is killed by Artemis accidentally. I don't know if this has any relevance but what I find more interesting is how Orion is compared to the Grail. The Grail is a feminine phallic symbol and the etymology of Orion is related to urine, so I've read or "to pour out". Heliopolis was probably a male phallic site and perhaps Giza was the accompanying female site. I know Heliopolis predates Giza (is that right?) but what you do you think about Giza as the location of the original egyptian labyrinth? If it was located there then it would fit quite nicely.

I was reaing a little about the Ark, it seems likely that it wasn't an object solely possedsed by the hebrews because there are some Ark's with egyptian decoration. As there is a place in the king's chamber that would hold the Ark going by the OT's measurements, what are the chances that it was taken out and stolen by the hebrews or anybody else for that matter?

Edited July 3, 2010 by SlimJim22

[danielost]

you see i am still having a problem with this.

if the egyptians saw the hebrew as part of one or both of the other groups, they wouldnt have seperated them from said groups when they left. so they wouldnt have called them the Nez Perce but just indians. which is what most americans do when it comes to indians they are all the same group or are they.

i bet a lot of you didnt know that the camanche and the apache are the same group of indians.

[Indiogene]

Alright, the Aunu connection with the Hyksos is a much bigger mystery, and some scholars pinpointed the Ainu of Hokkaido, Japan to be linked with Aunu of Egypt. Some speculation about the Ainu are descendants of the Jomon, the ancient people forefathered Japanese civilization over 5,000 years ago, have originated in India and Yemen or Oman in the Arabia Peninsula. The Jomon are an east Asian people, but the Ainu have facial characteristics similar to Europeans and their ethnoracial cousins are about 3,000 miles away in the steppes of Siberia. How could the Aunu migrated from Egypt into Turkistan and all the way towards the Japanese islands? The Ainu are a sub-racial group for most of their history before the contact and subjugation by the Japanese in the 16th-19th centuries, have lived in separate enclave situations in the colder climes of Hokkaido, Sakhalin and Kuril Islands.

[danielost]

Alright, the Aunu connection with the Hyksos is a much bigger mystery, and some scholars pinpointed the Ainu of Hokkaido, Japan to be linked with Aunu of Egypt. Some speculation about the Ainu are descendants of the Jomon, the ancient people forefathered Japanese civilization over 5,000 years ago, have originated in India and Yemen or Oman in the Arabia Peninsula. The Jomon are an east Asian people, but the Ainu have facial characteristics similar to Europeans and their ethnoracial cousins are about 3,000 miles away in the steppes of Siberia. How could the Aunu migrated from Egypt into Turkistan and all the way towards the Japanese islands? The Ainu are a sub-racial group for most of their history before the contact and subjugation by the Japanese in the 16th-19th centuries, have lived in separate enclave situations in the colder climes of Hokkaido, Sakhalin and Kuril Islands.

how long would it take for a family to traverse asia and then travel across the pacific in a junk or in the case i am thinking several junks.