Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Abramelin

Did ancient native American seafarers cross

265 posts in this topic

Hey Lightly I fixed up my box by cutting out a couple of windows and a front and back door.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that is the way to ship your dead corpse to Europe, considering you would not have packed enough pheasant under glass and port wine to feed and drink everybody on the several-month trip.

Harte

They did all that.

And they knew how to fish, believe me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone.

This thread is NOT another thread about ******* Atlantis, ok?

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading an article at History News Network by George Erikson:Who Were The Earliest Americans.In the article he discusses that there were several pre-clovis groups of people that had traveled by boat to America.He states that some groups were of African,European,and Polinesian extraction.He also infers that these groups of people had been present in parts of North and South America before 12,000bp.

If these groups of people did arrive by boat it does not seem unreasonable that they could travel back and forth developing trade.It would also be reasonable to suggest that they could have exchanged knowledge with repect to building,art,science,and religion.Over a period of time as change of power occurs so would modification of social structure and myths,the knowledge of other cultures in different parts of the world may still have been available to these later cultures and it is posible that they were not traversing the unknown as we are assuming today.jmccr8

This does not mean they necessarily were crossing Atlantic in the boats! Before the Deluge the water levels were at least 30m lower than today, which was exposing multiple islands instead of what now is continental shelf. Even today the distance between Asia and America is something like 43 km and there are islands half-way, so one can make it in some 8 hours of rowing on a common yawl @ 5km/h, while a canoe is much faster and can do 20 or even 30 km/h. The same abundance of island at low waters allowed the Africans to reach the middle of Pacific (Melanesia) and from there it is a comparatively short distance to South America, so maybe the contact was going other way, to the East.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone.

This thread is NOT another thread about ******* Atlantis, ok?

Thank you.

I think this problem can be also fixed from your end, without poking the others - say to try some tranquilliser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey look Abe, I found a book.

THE AMERICAN DISCOVERY OF EUROPE

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-American-Discovery-of-Europe/Jack-D-Forbes/e/9780252031526

by this guy, could hardly knock his credentials:

Jack D. Forbes is professor of Native American studies and anthropology emeritus at the University of California, Davis. He is the author or editor of seventeen books, including Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples.

Some from the book review:

Synopsis

An independent and indigenous revision of established history

The American Discovery of Europe investigates the voyages of America’s Native peoples to the European continent before Columbus’s 1492 arrival in the “New World.” The product of over twenty years of exhaustive research in libraries throughout Europe and the United States, Jack D. Forbes employs a vast number of primary and secondary sources to paint a clear picture of the diverse and complex societies that comprised the Americas before 1492 and reveals the surprising Native American involvements in maritime trade and exploration.

Starting with an encounter by Columbus himself with mysterious people who had apparently been carried across the Atlantic on favorable currents, Forbes proceeds to a detailed discussion of ocean currents and then to exploring the seagoing expertise of early Americans in the Caribbean, on the coasts of Greenland, and beyond. He also discusses theories of ancient migrations, the evidence for human origins in the Americas, and other early visitors coming from Europe to America, including the Norse. The book closes with a discussion of Native travelers to Europe after 1493, when they came mostly as slaves. The provocative, extensively documented, and heartfelt conclusions of The American Discovery of Europe present an open challenge to received historical wisdom. This book will be of lasting importance to Native people and redefine the way future scholarship views American history.

Elizabeth Salt Copyright 2007 Reed Business Information - Library Journal

How much contact did Native Americans have with Europe in both the pre-Columbian and immediate post-contact time periods? Forbes (Native American studies & anthropology, emeritus, Univ. of California, Davis; Africans and Native Americans) attempts to make the case that a great deal of interaction occurred. He describes both supposed planned voyages and accidental trips (canoes being blown east by storms) by Native Americans to Europe during the centuries before Columbus's voyage in 1492. While Forbes thoroughly documents his sources, he makes frequent wide-ranging assumptions related to pre-Columbian Native American voyages based upon small bits of possible evidence. Post-contact reports of the kidnapping, enslavement, and shipment of significant numbers of indigenous American people to Europe by the Portuguese, Spanish, English, and Dutch in the 16th and 17th centuries are generally better documented and more widely accepted by anthropologists and historians.

A possibility it seems.

I know Jack personally. He has great credentials but he makes a lot of crap up. His integrity is shot even with members of his own tribe. One time he had Indians riding dinosaurs, another time he was backing Barry Fell. <_<

The possiblity that the Arawak-Taino crossed the Atlantic is very possible. Some archaeologist believe they traded as far as North Carolina in their outrigger canoes. Indians also have a great wanderlust and it was not unusual to find in historical records that someone from a faraway tribe showed up at a location claiming he was "only on a hunting trip". :yes:

Nice post Abe! :tu:

Lapiche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not mean they necessarily were crossing Atlantic in the boats! Before the Deluge the water levels were at least 30m lower than today, which was exposing multiple islands instead of what now is continental shelf. Even today the distance between Asia and America is something like 43 km and there are islands half-way, so one can make it in some 8 hours of rowing on a common yawl @ 5km/h, while a canoe is much faster and can do 20 or even 30 km/h. The same abundance of island at low waters allowed the Africans to reach the middle of Pacific (Melanesia) and from there it is a comparatively short distance to South America, so maybe the contact was going other way, to the East.

Hello Marabod,

Yes what you say is feisable and I might have said something along those lines but I was just speaking in reference to the article that I had read.I did not want to pursue anything too far off the article as I have a tendancy to kill threads with some of my reponses so I am trying to exercise some discression in my approach to certain subjects.I think that this is an interesting thread and would like to see how it developes.Thank jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Jack personally. He has great credentials but he makes a lot of crap up. His integrity is shot even with members of his own tribe. One time he had Indians riding dinosaurs, another time he was backing Barry Fell. <_<

The possiblity that the Arawak-Taino crossed the Atlantic is very possible. Some archaeologist believe they traded as far as North Carolina in their outrigger canoes. Indians also have a great wanderlust and it was not unusual to find in historical records that someone from a faraway tribe showed up at a location claiming he was "only on a hunting trip". :yes:

Nice post Abe! :tu:

Lapiche

But there is still a difference between North Carolina, which is basically still the same continent and crossing the Atlantic Ocean. This said, it still is an interesting idea to entertain.

@ Marabod : What deluge are we talking about here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here again, we have no scientific evidence that people had the knowledge of how to build ocean going "boats" that far back in time. But - just because there's no evidence doesn't mean they didn't have the knowledge, it just means we can't prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Marabod : What deluge are we talking about here?

The Biblical one (12,000 years ago, we have many legends of it worldwide) and the one before it (14,000 years ago). Those which are imprinted in Greenland ice core. If your search for the drilling of it you would find this out. The total gain in sea level during the thawing, associated witgh these two is about 30 m, while total sea level rise since the last IceAge is 108-110 m with following recent fall of 10 m. I thought it was a common domain information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Biblical one (12,000 years ago, we have many legends of it worldwide) and the one before it (14,000 years ago). Those which are imprinted in Greenland ice core. If your search for the drilling of it you would find this out. The total gain in sea level during the thawing, associated witgh these two is about 30 m, while total sea level rise since the last IceAge is 108-110 m with following recent fall of 10 m. I thought it was a common domain information.

Just wanting to make sure we talk about the same thing, that's all. Besides, I thought that was around 18.000 years ago, when the ice sheets from the most recent glacial maximum started melting, but I could have my numbers wrong.

Edited by TheSearcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Biblical one (12,000 years ago, we have many legends of it worldwide) and the one before it (14,000 years ago). Those which are imprinted in Greenland ice core. If your search for the drilling of it you would find this out. The total gain in sea level during the thawing, associated witgh these two is about 30 m, while total sea level rise since the last IceAge is 108-110 m with following recent fall of 10 m. I thought it was a common domain information.

I'm not sure what this jibberish is supposed to convey, but global sea levels bottomed out around 20,000 years ago due to extensive glaciation. They were at that point around 130 m lower than today. As the ice melted and ran back into the ocean, levels rose to their cureent levels around 10,000 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, consider the following: Plato does not simply "mention" Atlantis or place it somewhere out of reach; he refers to the message from Solon's diaries/memoirs.

If you read Timaeus, you'll see that this is simply not the case.

These memoirs existed for 200 years BEFORE Plato and were known among the educated Greeks.

Same as above. No such "diaries" mentioning this tale have ever even been hinted at, much less found or "well known" to anyone at all, even Plato.

Some copies of them were also existing centuries AFTER Plato, and were used by Plutarch to write Solon's Biography.

Plutarch's "source" was Plato, not Solon.

This means if Plato lied about a source, then we would sure had the contemporary remarks blaming him in lying, but we do not have them.

Plato was not an historian. Why would anyone accuse him of "lying" when everyone that read his work knew he was using allegory?

Like I said, if you read the other dialogues, you'll come to find Timaeus less palatable as a source for factual information.

In order to accuse Plato in telling lies one has to establish first that the source was referred falsely. This "factual" note from Timaeus has nothing in relation to what Plato himself was then making up of Atlantis, as when he was making it up, he did not refer to any source at all. It is the same as I refer to Napoleon's memoirs and tell about the battle of Waterloo - and then start to express my own fantasies about this battle without further referring to Napoleon. Different things!

Please check out this quote from The Republic:

How then may we devise one of those needful falsehoods of which we lately spoke --just one royal lie which may deceive the rulers, if that be possible, and at any rate the rest of the city?

What sort of lie? he said.

Nothing new, I replied; only an old Phoenician tale of what has often occurred before now in other places, (as the poets say, and have made the world believe,) though not in our time, and I do not know whether such an event could ever happen again, or could now even be made probable, if it did.

Source (Near the bottom of the page.)

Plato believes in the "noble lie" as a very useful instructional tool.

Everyone in his time (and after) that read his works knew this.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Biblical one (12,000 years ago, we have many legends of it worldwide) and the one before it (14,000 years ago). Those which are imprinted in Greenland ice core. If your search for the drilling of it you would find this out. The total gain in sea level during the thawing, associated witgh these two is about 30 m, while total sea level rise since the last IceAge is 108-110 m with following recent fall of 10 m. I thought it was a common domain information.

I don't think any of the big civilization were in place 12,000 years ago. So who would be making these trips across the islands?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Jack personally. He has great credentials but he makes a lot of crap up. His integrity is shot even with members of his own tribe. One time he had Indians riding dinosaurs, another time he was backing Barry Fell. disgust.gif

The possiblity that the Arawak-Taino crossed the Atlantic is very possible. Some archaeologist believe they traded as far as North Carolina in their outrigger canoes. Indians also have a great wanderlust and it was not unusual to find in historical records that someone from a faraway tribe showed up at a location claiming he was "only on a hunting trip". yes.gif

Nice post Abe! thumbsup.gif

Lapiche

YW Lapiche.

I read a few chapters of his book online, and I agree with you... I wasn't impresssed.

Instead we better read the PDF's in the OP.

Btw, it would be nice if you can post something here about the contacts of the Arawak - Taino (-Carib?) with North Carolina.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think any of the big civilization were in place 12,000 years ago. So who would be making these trips across the islands?

The Oannes. Perhaps they were indigenous to the oceans of the world and not just to the Persian Gulf.

Adapa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fertile Crescent

myth series

Adapa was a Babylonian mythical figure who unknowingly refused the gift of immortality. The story is first attested in the Kassite period (14th century BC).

Contents [hide]

1 Roles

2 As Oannes

3 References

4 Bibliography

[edit]Roles

Adapa was a mortal from a godly lineage, a son of Ea (Enki in Sumerian), the god of wisdom and of the ancient city of Eridu, who brought the arts of civilization to that city (from Dilmun, according to some versions). He broke the wings of Ninlil the South Wind, who had overturned his fishing boat, and was called to account before Anu. Ea, his patron god, warned him to apologise humbly for his actions, but not to partake of food or drink while he was in heaven, as it would be the food of death. Anu, impressed by Adapa's sincerity, offered instead the food of immortality, but Adapa heeded Ea's advice, refused, and thus missed the chance for immortality that would have been his.

Adapa is often identified as advisor to the mythical first (antediluvian) king of Eridu, Alulim. In addition to his advisory duties, he served as a priest and exorcist, and upon his death took his place among the Seven Sages or Apkallū. (Apkal, "sage", comes from Sumerian Abgallu (Ab=water, Gal=Great, Lu=man) a reference to Adapa, the first sage's association with water.)

Some scholars suggest the Abgallu were seafarers aboard a ship from the Indus River Valley/Mohenjo Daro civilization comparable in age to ancient Sumer and has some identified parallels to the Sumerian knowledge base (like Base-5 mathematics, irrigation systems/water management engineering and mud-brick cities)[citation needed] .

[edit]As Oannes

Oannes (Hovhannes [Հովհաննես] in Armenian) was the name given by the Babylonian writer Berossus in the 3rd century BC to a mythical being who taught mankind wisdom. Berossus describes Oannes as having the body of a fish but underneath the figure of a man. He is described as dwelling in the Persian Gulf, and rising out of the waters in the daytime and furnishing mankind instruction in writing, the arts and the various sciences.

The name "Oannes" was once conjectured to be derived from that of the ancient Babylonian god Ea [1], but it is now known that the name is the Greek form of the Babylonian Uanna (or Uan) a name used for Adapa in texts from the Library of Ashurbanipal. [2] [3]. The Assyrian texts attempt to connect the word to the Akkadian for a craftsman ummanu but this is a merely a pun [2]. Scholars have long speculated that the name might ultimately be derived from that of the 8th century figure of Jonah (Hebrew Yonah). Bible critics have made the reverse claim, although the Hebrew name has the known meaning of "dove". [4]

Oannes was portrayed as a man wearing the skin of a fish.

I hypothesized at one time that perhaps the Oannes and humans were evolving alongside each other, the Oannes being ever so much more clever than their land based friends, much more advanced, and had to come and teach people so that when the time came for them to intermingle, the humans were already educated. Perhaps the Oannes knew they had to eventually interbreed with humans, or maybe they themselves manipulated the DNA so they COULD interbreed with humans and not become extinct.

It was when I was trying to figure out the story of Atlantis that I had this notion. Poseidon supposedly ruled the sea he lived in a palace called Agae under the Aegaean Sea. How then did he breed with a human female?

Edited by Qoais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to throw a bone into the 'cage'.... and I hope those well informed on Egyptian history and native American history will be willing to give their opinions.

Most here will have heard about the socalled "Sea Peoples" that invaded Egypt in the second millenium BC.

What always fascinated me was the head dresses of some of these Sea Peoples, as depicted in Medinet Habu.

There were those with helmets with or without horns, other types of head dresses, some of them carried swords....and some carried bows,arrows and spears and on their heads something that looked to me as a crowns made of feathers.

As far as I know - and I don't know much, lol - there were no people in the Mediterranean who wore head dresses made of feathers.

I am aware of the fact these invasions/attacks took place around 1200 BC in Egypt.

OK, here are some pics:

An Arawak/Carib family:

Carib-Arawak-Family-Life-in-Trinidad-and-Tobago.jpg

A Sea People warrior (Medinet Habu):

seapeople1.jpg

A Tupi-Guarani (Brasil) :

200px-Cacique_tupinikin_2007.jpg

I also know that according to history the Carib invaded the Caribbean from the mainland of northern South America quite recently, like a 1000 years ago.

But I don't know much about the Tupi-Guarani who lived in Brasil.

There is a town on the Brasilian coast with a Tupi-Guarani name which translates into "Place of many boats" (Ubatuba).

The Tupi-Guarani are the largest indigenous tribe living in Brasil, and they also live(d) in Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina.

EDIT:

SEaPeople_Invasion_Routes.jpg

If the pic doesn't show up, here's the url:

http://www.artsales....sion_Routes.jpg.

..and it's from this site:

http://www.artsales....ea_peoples.html

These "Weshesh" appear to be coming from the Baltic and present UK area. Did the Baltics and UK-Celts wear feathers on their heads??

I think these Weshesh could have come from anywhere... maybe from the Caribbean or Brasil???

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to throw a bone into the 'cage'.... and I hope those well informed on Egyptian history and native American history will be willing to give their opinions.

Most here will have heard about the socalled "Sea Peoples" that invaded Egypt in the second millenium BC.

What always fascinated me was the head dresses of some of these Sea Peoples, as depicted in Medinet Habu.

There were those with helmets with or without horns, other types of head dresses, some of them carried swords....and some carried bows,arrows and spears and on their heads something that looked to me as a crowns made of feathers.

As far as I know - and I don't know much, lol - there were no people in the Mediterranean who wore head dresses made of feathers.

I am aware of the fact these invasions/attacks took place around 1200 BC in Egypt.

OK, here are some pics:

An Arawak/Carib family:

A Sea People warrior (Medinet Habu):

A Tupi-Guarani (Brasil) :

I also know that according to history the Carib invaded the Caribbean from the mainland of northern South America quite recently, like a 1000 years ago.

But I don't know much about the Tupi-Guarani who lived in Brasil.

There is a town on the Brasilian coast with a Tupi-Guarani name which translates into "Place of many boats" (Ubatuba).

The Tupi-Guarani are the largest indigenous tribe living in Brasil, and they also live(d) in Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentina.

EDIT:

If the pic doesn't show up, here's the url:

http://www.artsales....sion_Routes.jpg.

..and it's from this site:

http://www.artsales....ea_peoples.html

These "Weshesh" appear to be coming from the Baltic and present UK area. Did the Baltics and UK-Celts wear feathers on their heads??

I think these Weshesh could have come from anywhere... maybe from the Caribbean or Brasil???

Ahem.

http://books.google.com/books?id=h7tWn3cBLBMC&pg=PA223&lpg=PA223&dq=%22feathered+headdress%22+persian&source=bl&ots=0KNuORqGqc&sig=4SLvYxwdsvd_Ls513xucMbPNHDU&hl=en&ei=7TyES5y3JOX18QbMy8SqAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CBcQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=%22feathered%20headdress%22%20persian&f=false

Pan up to page 217 and read to the linked point on 223.

As to your map, from the originating site:

The map above is an illustration of the known routes used in Twelfth Century BCE seafaring and trade with suggestions made for the geographic origins of the Wheshesh, Karshishka, Shekelesh and Danuna.

Key word suggested. They've been linked literally all over the map. There's no reason then to assume one over the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any of the big civilization were in place 12,000 years ago. So who would be making these trips across the islands?

Corp, we call "civilization" a certain stage of social development. It suggests some advanced technologies like metallurgy, advanced form of religions, distinctive form of government and Law, but most of all it suggests the literacy and chronological records. When a society is well advanced and urbanized, but it lacks the records/archives/massive literacy, this is called now "late barbarism". As an example we can compare the point of say 300BC when there was advanced Hellenic civilization (Greece and Rome) co-existing with advanced Egyptian, Persian and Phoenician civilizations - as well as with multiple barbarian states like those of Thracia and Illyria. Technologically they all were on the same level except some minor details, but we do not hear about Thracian and Illyrian Historians of antiquity, same as about their chronological records.

However even in Stone Age about 40,000-20,000 years ago we have a clear evidence of a structured society and developed international trade. Deep in Siberia we have the remains of a FACTORY discovered, which was employing over 150 people and producing stone arrowheads for export needs, with all workers performing the distinctive operations and their tables arranged in a conveyor fashion. Same area reveals African and Mediterranean products which can be identified by the specific sea shells sometimes used in them. The same period similar factories also reveal technologies which we do not have anymore - for example the technology of straightening of the mammoth tusks, as there are spears and darts available made of one solid piece, we now have no idea how to do this. I am not trying to divert the discussion by concentrating on these discoveries, I am only trying to say that already during the mid-early warming after the last Ice Age, the human society was pretty well advanced, and whatever humans were living in Americas were probably advanced too.

Thus the issue of prehistoric civilizations, such as Atlantis supposedly was or not, is not related to the ability of early humans to produce "high-tech" products including most likely large size rafts or even ships, as we know now they already had international trade. This proves nothing of the alleged ability of the American tribes to cross Atlantic, but denies nothing too - practically we know that the island-hopping was the main way of humans to spread worldwide to isolated areas such as South Pacific; so if there was an island system existing, which we allege as "Atlantis" then such island-hopping could be possible in Atlantic too - but if the Atlantic ocean 12,000 years ago was the same as we have it today, then of course this decreases such possibility, as the absence of numerous islands calls for ocean-worthy ships to be built, which as we know was not the case till about 1000-1500 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as I know - and I don't know much, lol - there were no people in the Mediterranean who wore head dresses made of feathers.

Abramelin, the statement in the first part of your this phrase sounds more true than the statement in the second part. If you look at the actual map, you would see that it is only one side of Egypt which faces the Mediterranean, while its other, southern, side faces Black Africa. And Black Africa is exactly the place where the head dresses made of feathers are worn! Just look at that:

pod9_ah_3.jpg

No need in American invaders, enough to ride a donkey for few days down south!

Edited by marabod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read Timaeus, you'll see that this is simply not the case.

Same as above. No such "diaries" mentioning this tale have ever even been hinted at, much less found or "well known" to anyone at all, even Plato.

Plutarch's "source" was Plato, not Solon.

Plato was not an historian. Why would anyone accuse him of "lying" when everyone that read his work knew he was using allegory?

Like I said, if you read the other dialogues, you'll come to find Timaeus less palatable as a source for factual information.

In order to accuse Plato in telling lies one has to establish first that the source was referred falsely. This "factual" note from Timaeus has nothing in relation to what Plato himself was then making up of Atlantis, as when he was making it up, he did not refer to any source at all. It is the same as I refer to Napoleon's memoirs and tell about the battle of Waterloo - and then start to express my own fantasies about this battle without further referring to Napoleon. Different things!

Please check out this quote from The Republic:

Source (Near the bottom of the page.)

Plato believes in the "noble lie" as a very useful instructional tool.

Everyone in his time (and after) that read his works knew this.

Harte

Harte, the version of history, you personally chose to adhere to, requires the points you promote - but these points do not constitute historical facts, they constitute the later assessments of these facts. Say, for your version of history to prsent a true development, we have to assume:

1. Plato was a liar

2. There was no memoirs by Solon existing

the same time we also must assume that

3. Plutarch was writing the Biography of Solon, basing on Plato - which automatically calls for

4. Plato was a biographer of Solon.

The #4 is untrue, as Plato was not such a biographer, and Plutarch was basing on Solon's memoirs themselves, which makes #2 to be untrue as well. But if #2 is untrue, and Plato was having access to the mentioned Memoirs, then all you are basing on is the author's right to present an existing source in a form of a legend, told by one of the heroes of his philosophical essay/dialogue! Plato is a writer, as you noted correctly he is not a historian at all - and you deny his right to write his writings the way he finds better! Not only this - he was not a historian only, he was a not a politician too! The Republic is his VISION, not his political agenda! Same is Timaeus - this is LITERATURE, not a historical record of Atlantis.

None of us here is capable to present an absolutely correct view on prehistory - because we all miss the factual materials about it. The value of Plato is that his is THE ONLY secular source about Prehistory, of which we have absolutely no idea except reconstructions, based on some scarce archaeological findings, on broken clay pots! All our other sources on Prehistory are of religious nature. When we express our "concepts" we must be ready for the others to see them as untrue or even bizarre (like the one of Abramelin, who vigorously rejects even the very idea of Atlantis, but the same time insists some Komanches invaded Egypt in HISTORICAL times of 1200 BC...), what I express or you are under the similar type of auspicies. The truth in all what we express must be somewhere in the middle of the opposite points we highlight, provided of course the points we express are as valid as possible. Basically, a user which starts to challenge the fact or the dates of deluge, or the "validity" some ancient legends we use, simply pollutes the thread as such contribution, based on outright denial of everything, is not positive. I can hear what you are saying about Plato's unreliability as a source - but I do not treat him as a source! I treat him as a writer, who mentions some old legend, and I know this legent was in the missing memoirs of Solon, telling about his travel to Sais, and I KNOW this travel took place during his voluntary exile, when he took a promise from Athenians to stick to his new laws at least till he returns back, and then left the country for 10 long years. So the Sais part, Solon's travels there, availability of Egyptian records and existence of memoirs are practically established historical facts. Why would I dismiss them to meet your theory in total? You give the links to some "sources" calling him "a liar", but is the fame and level of recognition of their authors matching those of his own? I mean I won't completely discard them, but I would hardly abandon Plato and stick to some philosophical chihuahua instead.

Edited by marabod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must also add, that the issue of Plato, talking about the state of Atlantis, perished during the deluge 12,000 years ago falls in severe contradiction with the official Christian Theology, which for centuries was insisting on the world being created some 8000 years ago and the Deluge taking place some 6000 years ago (numbers approximate). As such Timaeus is an open challenge to Religion and the Church, not less than Darwin's Evolution! This alone reveals the highest interest of serious forces for Plato being pictured as a liar, and forces the interested reader to scrutinise the sources, insisting on this, as well as the funding behind them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abramelin, the statement in the first part of your this phrase sounds more true than the statement in the second part. If you look at the actual map, you would see that it is only one side of Egypt which faces the Mediterranean, while its other, southern, side faces Black Africa. And Black Africa is exactly the place where the head dresses made of feathers are worn! Just look at that:

pod9_ah_3.jpg

No need in American invaders, enough to ride a donkey for few days down south!

Must be me, but that head dress doesn't resemble to one I see on the Medinet Habu murals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahem.

http://books.google....persian&f=false

Pan up to page 217 and read to the linked point on 223.

As to your map, from the originating site:

Key word suggested. They've been linked literally all over the map. There's no reason then to assume one over the other.

OK, show me a Persian sailor with a feathered head dress.

And the Persians were known for their big curly beards.

I see no beards anywhere.

THIS guy's head dress (Carib) does resemble what we can see on the Medinet Habu murals:

Carib-Arawak-Family-Life-in-Trinidad-and-Tobago.jpg

With bow and arrows, heh..

seapeople1.jpg

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must also add, that the issue of Plato, talking about the state of Atlantis, perished during the deluge 12,000 years ago falls in severe contradiction with the official Christian Theology, which for centuries was insisting on the world being created some 8000 years ago and the Deluge taking place some 6000 years ago (numbers approximate). As such Timaeus is an open challenge to Religion and the Church, not less than Darwin's Evolution! This alone reveals the highest interest of serious forces for Plato being pictured as a liar, and forces the interested reader to scrutinise the sources, insisting on this, as well as the funding behind them.

I think it pertinent to point out what occurred after Plato with the conquests of Alexander and the destruction of the Great Library. Plus you've then got the rise of christianity and then islam. Thus, many workds that would have shed light could have been lost. Perhaps Plato was a genius in the sense tha he wove certain truths into his works in such a way that the reader could barely fathom what he was reading but accepted the details at face value. With hindsight we may be able to translate some of the things to wwhich Plato referred in oredr to better understand prehistory. There are a few other issues that may be relevant. We have no evidence of hebrew scriptures before the captivity so there is a questionmark over the authenticity. It may be based on true oral traditions but it would be easy to alter dates to affect a wider message. That being the denial of ancient civilizations.

Plato's dates seem to largely fit with the end of the ice age and we would expect a deluge to result. The data also proves that the Sahara was inhabitable in pre history so this cannot be ruled out.

Ultimately, we've got to consider the reality of competing agendas and conclude that what was written was intended but it not essentially true. Is it signifcant or just romantic that Plato's writings have survived and are still arousing so much debate? Sorry for going off topic but I wanted to participiate in the discussion going on.

The argument for west africans to America seems more convincing than the OP suggestion but I think Atlantis had all races didn't ? So, in that sense the OP is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.