23 replies to this topic

[Abramelin]

Paracelse, on 31 December 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

They were indeed more Germanic but they definitely mixed with Celts in the Eastern European regions, just like the Slavs did.  The reasons for bringing the "sunstone" was Tuaregs and Basques were seafarers of might and they must have had a mean to direct themselves around.

Yes, they mixed with many people they conquered or whose land they invaded/raided, but that happened some 4000 years after the period I talk about. Around 3000 BCE they still lived quite separated from the Celts, and most probably the Celts had not even arrived in Europe.

Well, unless the latest theory is true, and that the Celts originated from a people related to the present Basques, but then still, the Celts would have lived at the Atlantic coast of mainland Europe (southern and western France, Iberia) and Switzerland, while the Germanic tribes lived far to the north and east of pre-Celtic territory.

If the ancient Iberians sailed to the far north and east (Baltic), why does this sunstone only show up many thousands of years later with the Vikings?

.

Edited by Abramelin, 31 December 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[Paracelse]

Abramelin, on 31 December 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

Yes, they mixed with many people they conquered or whose land they invaded/raided, but that happened some 4000 years after the period I talk about. Around 3000 BCE they still lived quite separated from the Celts, and most probably the Celts had not even arrived in Europe.

Well, unless the latest theory is true, and that the Celts originated from a people related to the present Basques, but then still, the Celts would have lived at the Atlantic coast of mainland Europe (southern and western France, Iberia) and Switzerland, while the Germanic tribes lived far to the north and east of pre-Celtic territory.

If the ancient Iberians sailed to the far north and east (Baltic), why does this sunstone only show up many thousands of years later with the Vikings?

.

I know the Amber trade goes back 4000 years ago at least from books I've read in the past but so we know someone was visiting the Baltic area back then but I couldn't find how far back it really goes.

[Abramelin]

Paracelse, on 31 December 2012 - 11:40 AM, said:

I know the Amber trade goes back 4000 years ago at least from books I've read in the past but so we know someone was visiting the Baltic area back then but I couldn't find how far back it really goes.

The amber routes were land and river routes, most from the Baltic (maybe also the North Sea) to the Adriatic and the Black Sea area. They must have been old for Baltic amber shows up in ancient Egypt,

.

Edited by Abramelin, 31 December 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[Paracelse]

I really don't remember where I've read about the amber and the slave trade with Middle East.  But I'm clearly recall sea routes rather than land routes.  Coming from Istanbul to the Noth Sea by land is very dangerous.  Even today

[Abramelin]

Paracelse, on 02 January 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

I really don't remember where I've read about the amber and the slave trade with Middle East.  But I'm clearly recall sea routes rather than land routes.  Coming from Istanbul to the Noth Sea by land is very dangerous.  Even today

But was it the same 5000 years ago? Perhaps you're thinking of something around 1500 BCE or much later, during Roman times..

[Paracelse]

Abramelin, on 02 January 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

But was it the same 5000 years ago? Perhaps you're thinking of something around 1500 BCE or much later, during Roman times..

Might be it.. right now I've got my head up my a-- with  the 100 years war between England and France for a project of mine and Joah of Arc viewed by an French excentric called Grasset d'Orcet and has nothing to do with Basques and Tuaregs

[TheSearcher]

The_Spartan, on 29 December 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

Kobe??? goddess of mecca?

could you please provide some more info on this "goddess"??

Methinks he might have meant the three daughters of Hubal. The main goddesses of Meccan Arabian mythology, which were Al-lāt, Al-‘Uzzá, and Manāt. Each of these was associated with certain domains and had shrines, which were destroyed. Al-lāt is the goddess associated with the underworld. Al-‘Uzzá, was a fertility goddess. Manāt was the goddess of fate. One important thing to remember, the Kaaba of Mecca, did exist prior to Islam and was covered in symbols representing the myriad demons, djinn, demigods, tribal gods and other assorted deities, which represented the polytheistic culture of pre-Islamic Arabia.

So in a nuttshell, goddess of Mecca is most likely plausible, however the name Kobe is probably wrong, unless the Tuareg gave one of the above a totally different name. Sorry, my pre-Islamic arabian mythology is a bit lacking.

[Paracelse]

TheSearcher, on 03 January 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

Methinks he might have meant the three daughters of Hubal. The main goddesses of Meccan Arabian mythology, which were Al-lāt, Al-‘Uzzá, and Manāt. Each of these was associated with certain domains and had shrines, which were destroyed. Al-lāt is the goddess associated with the underworld. Al-‘Uzzá, was a fertility goddess. Manāt was the goddess of fate. One important thing to remember, the Kaaba of Mecca, did exist prior to Islam and was covered in symbols representing the myriad demons, djinn, demigods, tribal gods and other assorted deities, which represented the polytheistic culture of pre-Islamic Arabia.

So in a nuttshell, goddess of Mecca is most likely plausible, however the name Kobe is probably wrong, unless the Tuareg gave one of the above a totally different name. Sorry, my pre-Islamic arabian mythology is a bit lacking.

Actually if you had my next post I corrected myself.  The name I should have used was Kore

[TheSearcher]

Paracelse, on 04 January 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

Actually if you had my next post I corrected myself.  The name I should have used was Kore

Well I did say the name was prolly incorrect. At least it fills out the gaps that might still persist otherwise.