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 5
The Puzzler

Trojans were Basques?

641 posts in this topic

Note the title is 2 questions.

I have been thinking about this for a long time now, it seems to me it wouldn't be too hard to imagine that ancient sailors from the Atlantic seaboard, (where Portugal now is, up to Basque country) who have a darker Mediterranean look, like the Spanish, usually dark brown/black eyes, curly dark hair etc, arrived in the Mediterranean and landed in Libya, Malta, Sicily, Crete and even on to Troy. Bringing in the male Earth bull, and that darker look they have than Northern Europeans.

I pointed out once a painting that showed a consistency in the dress of ancient Crete...

RP2S000Z.jpg

Portugese Ladies in Goa

The ladies have their breasts out, not only that, the black snake curl hair can also be seen. So, I reckon they look like Cretans for a start, and they bought in the Bull. I'm aware the bull can be found at early sites in Near East but I also think that a bull cult also developed in the East, that of a mother cow cult, not the male Earth bull. I also think the Lion motif may have come in with these European people. The Bull and Lion are seen all through the Paleolithic in Europe.

Then I was checking out the Basque language, because I like to look at languages and play 'lego linguistics', but I couldn't help but notice one word...

hiri `Town, city'. The word is ancient, and its earlier form *ili is attested in a number of ancient place names, the most famous being the mysterious Iliberris in Granada (modern Elvira); this is transparently *ili plus berri `new', but no one knows how a Basque place name could be found so far south.

http://www.buber.net/Basque/Euskara/Larry/WebSite/basque.words.html

Another guy who got panned badly did try to decipher Linear A into Basque, seems it was 'lego linguistics' too, but who knows really, could be something in it.

Anyway, the word above is hiri but an earlier form is ILI which means town or city... of course I then immediately thought of Ilium of the Iliad, always known as the CITY of Troy.

Nothing says this name cannot be Wilusa, which would just be a changed form of the true ILI sound for city/town. I could then move onto Iberia in the Caucasus, where Colchis and the River Phasis was.

ibai `River'. This is the most widespread word, though there exists also uhalde, ugalde, especially in the east; this is a compound of ur `water' and alde `side'. The word ibai itself appears to be a derivative of ibar `valley', but perhaps originally `water-meadow'. Curiously, perhaps, the great majority of river names in the Basque Country are of non-Basque origin, though an outstanding exception is the biggest river in the Basque heartland, the Ibaizabal, from ibai plus zabal `wide'.

http://www.buber.net/Basque/Euskara/Larry/WebSite/basque.words.html

I'll leave it at that for now, finding the word ILI as city/town was interesting though.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A layman question, keeping your lego linguistics aside

Troy as far as current archaeological studies have ascertained is in turkey

Crete is no where near troy. why link them together?

Forget It.....i cant keep lego linguistics aside..its plainly that..sorry to comment in this thread.

Your assumption is purely based on Lego Linguistics, Not at all on archaeological evidence.

Edited by The_Spartan
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A layman question, keeping your lego linguistics aside

Troy as far as current archaeological studies have ascertained is in turkey

Crete is no where near troy. why link them together?

Forget It.....i cant keep lego linguistics aside..its plainly that..sorry to comment in this thread.

Your assumption is purely based on Lego Linguistics, Not at all on archaeological evidence.

Yeah OK Spartan, why link them together? Who says the same people, Cretans or even Therans did not settle Troy? Do they have to be next to each other? I'm talking sailors who sailed and moved around.

SO, what do you find so 'lego' about 'ili' being the base for Ilium or are you just getting off on joining the fray who criticise every thing I suggest just for the sake of it?

Edited by The Puzzler
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's 2 more more words from Basque I found interesting:

haran `Valley'. This is the nearly universal Basque word for `valley', though ibar is used alongside it and is preferred in places. The word is native and clearly ancient, and it occurs in a large number of place names and surnames, such as the surname Haraneder `beautiful valley', and the surname Arana `the valley',

ur `Water'. The word is ancient and well-attested in place names and surnames,

http://www.buber.net/Basque/Euskara/Larry/WebSite/basque.words.html

These people could have filtered in to the Mediterranean and surrounds from who know when, but I suggest around 4500BC they started to settle within the Pillars of Heracles.

I've read this book: (from the library)

518vhtNeqNL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Facing-Ocean-Atlantic-Peoples-BC-AD/dp/0199240191

From what I read it seems very likely these Atlantic people were MORE than capable of sailing into the Mediterranean at early dates.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Context for that picture of the ladies please. Goa is in India and that picture is clearly in an Indian style. What the picture is actually intended to portray then may not be entirely what it appears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Context for that picture of the ladies please. Goa is in India and that picture is clearly in an Indian style. What the picture is actually intended to portray then may not be entirely what it appears.

Sorry, here's the link for that picture, although I have it in a book I own as well. Fair enough, still, those Brazilians, who are Portugese seem very 'sexual' or such, like it is part of their culture.

http://www.art.com/products/p11720704-sa-i1346203/portuguese-women-eating-a-meal-goa.htm?aff=conf&ctid=0&rfid=355427&tkid=15034199&

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a problem in imagining prehistoric Portugese dispersing into neighboring regions. What would've caused them to migrate from their homeland in the first place, and in what numbers? How far could they have gone? Ancient Portugese would've lived on or near the coast in the first place, so setting out on foot and moving in small bands easily could've occurred. However, widespread prehistoric sea travel is virtually unevidenced, so lots of people setting out onto the sea more than 5,000 years ago is not terribly realistic. Travel by foot is realistic. And prehistoric migrations were principally composed of small bands of wanderers.

The_Spartan brings up fair points. "Lego linguistics" must be avoided: just because a word or part of a word sounds somewhat similar to a word or part of a word in a distant place within a distant culture, does not mean any cultural or societal connection is implied. All ancient names known for the site commonly thought to be Troy, as far as I'm aware, are archaic Greek or Hittite in origin. In the Late Bronze Age, when the battle of Troy is set, Mycenaeans had made inroads into western Asia Minor, but most settlements in that area were still composed of peoples native to western Asia Minor.

Moreover, Spartan's question about archaeology is essential to consider. The material culture of the site has to be evaluated and understood, above and beyond place names. In fact, the material culture of the site is of more importance in the end than whatever the site may have been anciently named. That said, can the ceramics, lithics, metalworks, and other such products of ancient Hissarlik be connected to that being produced in contemporary periods in ancient Portugal? I am not aware of such findings, which people much smarter than we posters would've discovered and noted long ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello KMT_sesh,

You make some good points,however it would seem that there must have been some form of mass migrations by sea in prehistory.I remember reading and article several years ago about ritualistic burials 60kyrs ago in Australia,seeing as there is no landbridge it would appear that there must have been some form of nautical transportation to get there.If that is a given possibility then when in history would that knowledge have been lost so as not to have been able to do so 5k ago?

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello KMT_sesh,

You make some good points,however it would seem that there must have been some form of mass migrations by sea in prehistory.I remember reading and article several years ago about ritualistic burials 60kyrs ago in Australia,seeing as there is no landbridge it would appear that there must have been some form of nautical transportation to get there.If that is a given possibility then when in history would that knowledge have been lost so as not to have been able to do so 5k ago?

jmccr8

Hi j, I have a good book by Josephine Flood, Archaeology of the Dreamtime, the studies seem to indicate that at c. 75,000BC the waters were shallow enough to cross over by foot, but I agree, boats are not that hard to construct for these people, they just get a log and hollow it out and can sail for miles island hopping mostly, it's not inconceivable imo to find none of these today, so showing no evidence of log canoes at such an early date. The Aboriginals themselves say they were always here, that here is where man developed, and from here is where they spread from, they say they are the original creation and this is their original land.

I just bought the new issue of New Dawn magazine and ironies of ironies, one of the main articles is about whether Egyptians arrived in Australia at very early dates. This topic was my first ever on UM, where Harte and I got off to a rough start, I ended up at that time admitting my ignorance and conceded defeat to Harte on the subject, but I have not forgotten it and keep it in my mind.

SPV6N1.jpg

This article repeats what I said about Aboriginals saying they were first man and alot of evidence is starting to show up that may be proving this correct, like Lucia in South America. I actually find this magazine very inspirational and many of my topics have come about after reading an article in it. Thanks for your post because even back that far, I do agree that it would not have been impossible for ancient people to make floating canoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a problem in imagining prehistoric Portugese dispersing into neighboring regions. What would've caused them to migrate from their homeland in the first place, and in what numbers? How far could they have gone? Ancient Portugese would've lived on or near the coast in the first place, so setting out on foot and moving in small bands easily could've occurred. However, widespread prehistoric sea travel is virtually unevidenced, so lots of people setting out onto the sea more than 5,000 years ago is not terribly realistic. Travel by foot is realistic. And prehistoric migrations were principally composed of small bands of wanderers.

The_Spartan brings up fair points. "Lego linguistics" must be avoided: just because a word or part of a word sounds somewhat similar to a word or part of a word in a distant place within a distant culture, does not mean any cultural or societal connection is implied. All ancient names known for the site commonly thought to be Troy, as far as I'm aware, are archaic Greek or Hittite in origin. In the Late Bronze Age, when the battle of Troy is set, Mycenaeans had made inroads into western Asia Minor, but most settlements in that area were still composed of peoples native to western Asia Minor.

Moreover, Spartan's question about archaeology is essential to consider. The material culture of the site has to be evaluated and understood, above and beyond place names. In fact, the material culture of the site is of more importance in the end than whatever the site may have been anciently named. That said, can the ceramics, lithics, metalworks, and other such products of ancient Hissarlik be connected to that being produced in contemporary periods in ancient Portugal? I am not aware of such findings, which people much smarter than we posters would've discovered and noted long ago.

Glad you can at least consider the possibility that these people dispersed somewhere.

The area they live is below the English Channel and much of the Bay of Biscay is quite shallow. Consider Abe's Doggerland thread, we know from that info that the Storegga Slide which finally created enough disruption geologically to collapse the remaining land in that area and break through the English Channel would have been a flooding of mass proportions for areas south, ie; in the Bay of Biscay. Get a map and envision it, I stare at maps alot, just looking and perceiving the areas, the way the lands lie, also as the ice melted in Scandinavia, the land tilted down in the south as it rose in the North, much of southern Spain would have been higher land at one point, it has lowered by isometric rebound.

So, considering all that, imo it is not hard to see how the area of Aquitani, Bay of Biscay, to the Basque area, Cantabria and all along the Atlantic coast where Portugal is, be inundated at this time. This imo is what would have created a migration out.

I'm not trying to say this is Atlantis, I am trying to tie in what I see as logical movements in people that I note have alot of similarities.

Look at the map again, as you come through the straits, Tunisia would be a logical stop point, then Malta, to Sicily, onto Crete, to Thera - these are logical migration points along the route in and all show similarities in early structures, Euro. styled dolmens, menhirs, temples and other assorted connections in patterns, lifestyle, Mothers etc.

I'm happy to say maybe they didn't sail in but it defeats my point really, the idea is they sailed in and landed at those places I said because they are on the sailing route - Troy maybe was settled by same people but after a longer time frame so showing barely any connections but again I do think they are there and I will go on in this thread to attempt to show as many connections as I can.

What you know is these names:

Troy (Hittite: Wilusa or Truwisa;[1][2] Greek: Ἴλιον, Ilion, and Τροία, Troia; Latin: Trōia and Īlium;[3] Turkish: Truva)

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

What you don't know is how the name came into Hittite and whether the name is actually Hittite, Greek or a foreign name - the Hittite name Wilusa may only have been how you said it in Hittite, not named BY Hittites or Greeks. Language is generally made of of many language elements, all English words are not actually all from England, some are bought in from French etc, the same would be true no matter how long ago. Place names are often kept from previous cultures also.

This name does not have to be Greek or Hittite so imo the argument you guys are placing on the same word base ili (city) having no meaning and no connection to the name Ilion/Ilium/Wilusa is actually meaningless because the name may have been in use for years beforehand.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Puzzler,

I didn't realize that water levels were that low at that time,if that is the case large rafts would be easy to construct and watching a log floating down a river would probably strike a spark in any playful mind to go for a ride.The article I read could have be National Geo or some other science publication that you find in the doctors office like I did.I do recall that they mentioned that the dna of the bodies found does not match any dna currently found in todays Aboriginies nor is it found in other areas globally,possibly Cormac or Swede would have better info on this.I know that I was somewhat surprised when I read it.I will take a look and see if I can find the book that you mentioned when I go to the library with my grand-daughter to get her some bedtime stories.jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@The Puzzler -

I have a good book by Josephine Flood, Archaeology of the Dreamtime, the studies seem to indicate that at c. 75,000BC the waters were shallow enough to cross over by foot

not to get off topic too much but i just want to clarify that at no time was australia/new guinea (sahul) accessible on foot from s.e. asia (sunda)

it was however only a few miles across a deep straight from the indonesian islands about 24000yrs ago which perhaps may have been just visible on the far horizon and easily accessed by the most primative rafts

http://sahultime.monash.edu.au/ (click on map for interactive app.)

Edited by blackdogsun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Puzzler,

I didn't realize that water levels were that low at that time,if that is the case large rafts would be easy to construct and watching a log floating down a river would probably strike a spark in any playful mind to go for a ride.The article I read could have be National Geo or some other science publication that you find in the doctors office like I did.I do recall that they mentioned that the dna of the bodies found does not match any dna currently found in todays Aboriginies nor is it found in other areas globally,possibly Cormac or Swede would have better info on this.I know that I was somewhat surprised when I read it.I will take a look and see if I can find the book that you mentioned when I go to the library with my grand-daughter to get her some bedtime stories.jmccr8

Hi jmccr8

Heres a map showing sea levels c 18000 years ago at the height of the last ice age;

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/topo/pictures/GLOBALsealeveldrop110m.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I know about the Basques

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_basques04.htm

Apparently they were occupying the area way before Troy became hemmm... Troy.

There are theories in France and abroad that Basques are most direct descendant of Neanderthals, which would explain their short stocky statures.

http://www.aoi.com.au/bcw/neanderbasque.htm

None of which came from official sources but hey, what can I say besides "never trust authority".

However the map showing the Neanderthal territory does includes Turkey and the later position of Troy which would explain some of the similarities in language.

Edited by Paracelse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The blood analysis was first written in popularized science book by French author Louis Charpentier in a book titled: Les Mysteres Basques published in 1975 then reprinted:

http://www.amazon.fr/Myst%C3%A8re-basque-Louis-Charpentier/dp/2221091825/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1328856931&sr=8-1

a book I'm rereading now (read it in the late 70's)

Edited by Paracelse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The blood analysis was first written in popularized science book by French author Louis Charpentier in a book titled: Les Mysteres Basques published in 1975 then reprinted:

http://www.amazon.fr/Myst%C3%A8re-basque-Louis-Charpentier/dp/2221091825/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1328856931&sr=8-1

a book I'm rereading now (read it in the late 70's)

Lol, that is the only book I have about the Basques (the first edition)!

post-18246-0-21139500-1328871562_thumb.j

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, that is the only book I have about the Basques (the first edition)!

post-18246-0-21139500-1328871562_thumb.j

We have the same copy... I had it in the US but shipped to myself when I moved here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Trojans weren't Basques.

The Basques

Considering that the Basques are, at best, Neolithic in origin then it's meaningless to make any claim as to their descent from Neanderthals who died out c.39,000 BP.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not to get off topic too much but i just want to clarify that at no time was australia/new guinea (sahul) accessible on foot from s.e. asia (sunda)

it was however only a few miles across a deep straight from the indonesian islands about 24000yrs ago which perhaps may have been just visible on the far horizon and easily accessed by the most primative rafts

http://sahultime.monash.edu.au/ (click on map for interactive app.)

Yes, rightly so, I should have accessed the book first.

"It was possible to walk from Burma to Bali, from New Guinea to Northern Australia but the gap between the Australian continent and Asia remained a land barrier."

Page 30.

That may have been 90,000 years ago though. At 75,000 years the sea was 68-75 metres less than what it is now and this is when they estimate they came in through Timor in light canoes, not on foot.

Edited by The Puzzler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jmccr8

Heres a map showing sea levels c 18000 years ago at the height of the last ice age;

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/topo/pictures/GLOBALsealeveldrop110m.jpg

Hello Jules99,

Thanks for the map,did you look at the interactive map that Blackdogsun provided?According to the map the lowest levels are at 23bp there may have been migrations at this time yet they would not account for the peoples already living in Australia,it would seem that at about 65bp would have been another period of lower sea levels however not as low so it would seem that some nautical abilities were needed to arrive.Well I won't draw it of topic any longer.

jmccr8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Trojans weren't Basques.

The Basques

cormac

I don't think you really know that, even though you think you might.

Legend has them (Trojans) arriving after a great flood, Dardanus founded Dardania, he was a son of Electra, a daughter of Atlas.

Atlas is no where else but in the West, always in the West, holding up the Sky. The myth therefore tells us it was settled by people who had originally been from the Western Ocean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Jules99,

Thanks for the map,did you look at the interactive map that Blackdogsun provided?According to the map the lowest levels are at 23bp there may have been migrations at this time yet they would not account for the peoples already living in Australia,it would seem that at about 65bp would have been another period of lower sea levels however not as low so it would seem that some nautical abilities were needed to arrive.Well I won't draw it of topic any longer.

jmccr8

jm - Your general assessment is not altogether incorrect. As always, timelines.

While there is some debate over the timing of the original human habitation of Australia, the timeframe of circa 40 kya to 50 kya would appear to have the most current support. This timeframe would be consistent with understandings regarding the movement of H.s.s. out of Africa (taking into account travel and adaptation to new environments).

If we utilize this timeframe, current studies indicate that a span of some 45-50 miles of open ocean would need to be traversed. Keep in mind that the visual horizon is ~ 14 miles. One must also consider the limited population base in regards to a major population movement.

As an aside, this does bring into question the purported presence of an undocumented bipedal primate with reportedly little or no advanced technological capability on said continent.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you really know that, even though you think you might.

Legend has them (Trojans) arriving after a great flood, Dardanus founded Dardania, he was a son of Electra, a daughter of Atlas.

Atlas is no where else but in the West, always in the West, holding up the Sky. The myth therefore tells us it was settled by people who had originally been from the Western Ocean.

None of which is supported by actual evidence whether physical or genetic. Comparative mythology/lego-linguistics, etc., particularly as applied in this forum, is the equivalent of making it up as you go along and presenting it as fact so I can see your interest in it. But it's not something with any scientific credibility to it, nor should it be seen that way.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you really know that, even though you think you might.

Legend has them (Trojans) arriving after a great flood, Dardanus founded Dardania, he was a son of Electra, a daughter of Atlas.

Atlas is no where else but in the West, always in the West, holding up the Sky. The myth therefore tells us it was settled by people who had originally been from the Western Ocean.

Cormac already addressed this but I'll weigh in, too. This is the problem: "Legend has them (Trojans)."

Legends are not real history!

Sorry, bit of a tantrum there. Now, it's plausible that some legends might contain a teeny kernel of truth, but that kernel would be buried so deeply in the dusts of time that prying it from its surrounding layers of fiction is nearly impossible. I know how well versed you are on Greek myths, Puzzler--much better versed than I'll ever be--but regarding myths as historically reliable is not a safe practice.

However much you might dislike it, we know what we know about factual history only because of archaeology, linguistics, genetics, and the myriad of other disciplines and sciences applied to the study of ancient civilizations. Had we never developed these means to study the past, we might well still believe Troy was a real event just as Homer recorded it...to name but one example.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cormac already addressed this but I'll weigh in, too. This is the problem: "Legend has them (Trojans)."

Legends are not real history!

Sorry, bit of a tantrum there. Now, it's plausible that some legends might contain a teeny kernel of truth, but that kernel would be buried so deeply in the dusts of time that prying it from its surrounding layers of fiction is nearly impossible. I know how well versed you are on Greek myths, Puzzler--much better versed than I'll ever be--but regarding myths as historically reliable is not a safe practice.

However much you might dislike it, we know what we know about factual history only because of archaeology, linguistics, genetics, and the myriad of other disciplines and sciences applied to the study of ancient civilizations. Had we never developed these means to study the past, we might well still believe Troy was a real event just as Homer recorded it...to name but one example.

That's OK kmt, I'm glad to hear your opinion, although I thought you'd answer my refute to your post in the Thera's ash topic, because I believe I did show that Athena and Poseidon were found in Linear B on Crete, contrare to what you thought. I'll just address the mythology issue in this post for now.

We all have our own disciplines, you probably know more about Egypt than I could fit in my little finger but I do know my mythology and I do my Greek and Mediterranean history, what I have read looking for Atlantis on those topics is alot I can just say that. This doesn't mean I'm right or even that this idea has merit but I have pondered this idea for years, it really isn't DIScredible imo, sure, there's barely any evidence but really, what do we have?

A city in a story, that was apparently found, we really don't even know if Hissarlik is Troy or whether Troy even existed, maybe it's just another Atlantis, it's amazing how much truth people actually DO place on myth, it really ingrains to become a historical truth. I'm aware of it and do know myths are tales but they will contain a truthful element in them which will be real history, such as Phaethon, Plato says, it's a myth but is based on a true event, even now we can hardly decipher what the actual Phaethon event was, but it's clearly based in a real event. Point being, they can be real history.

So underneath all the hype in the myth will be found real history and some truth, many people believe this and study this, it's not nonsense to think myths contain truth in a very disorted way.

From Plato, The Laws, Book 3:

Cle. What is that?

Ath. The form which in fact Homer indicates as following the second. This third form arose when, as he says, Dardanus founded Dardania:

For not as yet had the holy Ilium been built on the plain to be a city of speaking men; but they were still dwelling at the foot of many-fountained Ida. For indeed, in these verses, and in what he said of the Cyclopes, he speaks the words of God and nature; for poets are a divine race and often in their strains, by the aid of the Muses and the Graces, they attain truth.

Cle. Yes.

Ath. Then now let us proceed with the rest of our tale, which will probably be found to illustrate in some degree our proposed design:-Shall we do so?

Cle. By all means.

Ath. Ilium was built, when they descended from the mountain, in a large and fair plain, on a sort of low hill, watered by many rivers descending from Ida.

Cle. Such is the tradition.

Ath. And we must suppose this event to have taken place many ages after the deluge?

Ath. A marvellous forgetfulness of the former destruction would appear to have come over them, when they placed their town right under numerous streams flowing from the heights, trusting for their security to not very high hills, either.

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/laws.3.iii.html

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 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.