Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Let's talk history


kmt_sesh

Recommended Posts

407618531_7209351505763328_4936807402349How accurate is this image still? I mean its 3 yeas old....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Genome sequences of 36,000- to 37,000-year-old modern humans at Buran-Kaya III in Crimea

Populations genetically related to present-day Europeans first appeared in Europe at some point after 38,000–40,000 years ago, following a cold period of severe climatic disruption. These new migrants would eventually replace the pre-existing modern human ancestries in Europe, but initial interactions between these groups are unclear due to the lack of genomic evidence from the earliest periods of the migration. Here we describe the genomes of two 36,000–37,000-year-old individuals from Buran-Kaya III in Crimea as belonging to this newer migration. Both genomes share the highest similarity to Gravettian-associated individuals found several thousand years later in southwestern Europe. These genomes also revealed that the population turnover in Europe after 40,000 years ago was accompanied by admixture with pre-existing modern human populations. European ancestry before 40,000 years ago persisted not only at Buran-Kaya III but is also found in later Gravettian-associated populations of western Europe and Mesolithic Caucasus populations.

black-sea-political-map-max.jpg

 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1jIyGaa.jpg

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Megalithic monuments of the Azores


Here we present selected parts from two publications on the Megalithic monuments of the Azores.

1) “Early Atlantic Navigation: Pre-Portuguese Presence in the Azores Islands“, by António Félix Rodrigues, Nuno O. Martins, Nuno Ribeiro, Anabela Joaquinito.

“The Azores are nine islands situated in the North Atlantic, divided in three different groups: the Eastern group (constituted by the Island of São Miguel and the Island of Santa Maria), the Central Group (constituted by the Islands of Terceira, São Jorge, Pico, Faial and Graciosa), and the Western Group (constituted by the Islands of Flores and Corvo).

Clearly, discussions concerning who first navigated to the Azores are surrounded by much controversy. These discussions must also be undertaken with a willingness to face the evidence, including new evidence that arises and may challenge, or help interpreting, previous historiography. Here we will provide another piece of evidence, which supports the hypothesis that the Azores, or at least Terceira island, were indeed inhabited long before the Portuguese arrived. This piece of evidence was found near the Grota do Medo (Posto Santo), discovered by Rodrigues (2013), a grove, which contains many elements that possess striking similarities with several as-pects from ancient cultures, including man-made rock basins, arrangements of large stones which resemble megalithic constructions, and inscriptions in stones which resemble ancient petroglyphs engraves (Rodrigues, 2015).

https://novoscriptorium.com/2019/05/01/megalithic-monuments-of-the-azores/


https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Another-example-of-Rock-Art-at-Grota-do-Medo-site_fig9_276500015

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276500015_Megalithic_Constructions_Discovered_in_the_Azores_Portugal

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2023 at 7:33 AM, Hanslune said:

1jIyGaa.jpg

Those who created this map should have used more colors.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The [Lost] Pyramid of Athribis:

The pyramid of Athribis was a small mudbrick pyramid located at Athribis (Tell Atrib) in the southern Nile Delta, northeast of the modern city of Banha. It was located the furthest north of all the pyramids in ancient Egypt and the only known pyramid to have been built in the Delta.

Discovery and loss

The structure was first noted by scholarship during Napoleon's Egyptian Expedition (1798-1801). No real investigation was undertaken, however, aside from an engraving of the pyramid and a map of the ruins of Athribis which includes the pyramid, both of which were first published in the Description de l’Égypte in 1822.[1] After that, for a long time, the pyramid was forgotten.

The pyramid was first relocated in 1938 by a team from Liverpool University led by Alan Rowe. In the meanwhile the superstructure had been almost entirely destroyed. Time constraints prevented Rowe from undertaking close investigation and as a result his report was extremely short and contained no information beyond what had already been reported by the French expedition.[2]

The most recent attempt to locate the pyramid was undertaken in 1993 by the Polish Egyptologist Andrzej Ćwiek. By this time, however, Athribis had been almost entirely covered over by the modern city of Banha, the pyramid had been completely destroyed and its exact location could no longer be determined.

Structure

The dimensions of the pyramid were never exactly determined, so they can only be estimated from the information in the Description de l'Egypte. On the basis of mastabas appearing in the map, Ćwiek calculated that the pyramid measured about 20 m (66 ft) on each side. He estimated that the incline was less than 50°. This would imply a height of less than 16 m (52 ft).

Age and purpose

Map of Athribis from the Description de l'Egypte (1823). The pyramid is at the centre of the ruins, in the upper left corner of crossroads.

It is only possible to speculate about the age and purpose of the pyramid, owing to the extremely sparse datable material. The Egyptologist Nabil Swelim[3][4] and the former director of the DAI in Cairo Rainer Stadelmann[5][6] connect it with a group of seven small step pyramids (Elephantine, Edfu South, el-Kula, Naqada, Saujet el-Meitin [de], Seila and Sinki [de]) which were built at the end of the 3rd Dynasty (reigned c. 2686-c. 2613 BCE) or the start of the 4th (reigned ca. 2613 –ca. 2494 BC).

Stadelmann sees these structures as local instantiations of royal power, comparable to the Kaiserpfalz-system of the Holy Roman Empire, while Swelim instead suggests a religious purpose. However, the inclusion of the pyramid of Athribis within this group is not firmly demonstrated by either scholar. In fact it derives only from the fact that the hypothetical dimensions of the pyramid are similar to those of the other seven pyramids, while there are major factors arguing against the identification: firstly, the engraving in the Description depicts the Pyramid as a true pyramid, not a step pyramid like the other seven; secondly, the other seven pyramids are built of stone, while the pyramid of Athribis was made of brick. On account of this last point in particular, Ćwiek criticised Swelim and Stadelmann's inclusion of this pyramid in that group. He further considered it unlikely that a brick structure would have survived in such good condition from the Old Kingdom until the beginning of the 19th century. In his opinion, therefore, it was probably a pyramid from the 13th Dynasty (reigned 1803–1649 BC), if not the Late Period (c. 664 BC – 332 BC).[7]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Petrie did excavations at Athribis but does not mention the pyramid. What he does say is that within a block of 4th-6th Dynasty rock cut tombs at nearby Hagaresh, the 4th/5th Dynasty tomb of "Ka-cm-nofer" seem to model the internal structure of G1 at Giza. Petrie: 

The passages to these funeral chambers are peculiar, and the position of the coffins higher than the tomb chapels is also strange. The whole system seems to have been an imitation of the pyramid of Khufu, as we notice below....

The descending passage is common enough in tombs; but there is no example of the subsequent ascent, the only prototype of which is in the passages of the pyramid of Khufu. There are also details curiously like those in the pyramid. In the southern tomb the slope upward begins with a vertical face like the Grand Gallery; and the slope has a bench or ramp along both sides, like the gallery. In the northern tomb, though the slope merely has a vertical end, there is a groove on either wall, sloping down and up again, implying a passage sloping both ways, and reminding us of the groove cut in the wall of the Grand Gallery. The resemblance in apparently unimportant detail, and in the general idea of the passages and the square-cut massive coffins, connects these tombs so closely with the pyramid of Khufu, and with no other structure, that we must suppose Ka-em-nofer to have been familiar with that building, and to belong to that reign. This would agree well enough with the fine and bold style of the inscriptions.

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

The [Lost] Pyramid of Athribis:

The pyramid of Athribis was a small mudbrick pyramid located at Athribis (Tell Atrib) in the southern Nile Delta, northeast of the modern city of Banha. It was located the furthest north of all the pyramids in ancient Egypt and the only known pyramid to have been built in the Delta.

Discovery and loss

The structure was first noted by scholarship during Napoleon's Egyptian Expedition (1798-1801). No real investigation was undertaken, however, aside from an engraving of the pyramid and a map of the ruins of Athribis which includes the pyramid, both of which were first published in the Description de l’Égypte in 1822.[1] After that, for a long time, the pyramid was forgotten.

The pyramid was first relocated in 1938 by a team from Liverpool University led by Alan Rowe. In the meanwhile the superstructure had been almost entirely destroyed. Time constraints prevented Rowe from undertaking close investigation and as a result his report was extremely short and contained no information beyond what had already been reported by the French expedition.[2]

The most recent attempt to locate the pyramid was undertaken in 1993 by the Polish Egyptologist Andrzej Ćwiek. By this time, however, Athribis had been almost entirely covered over by the modern city of Banha, the pyramid had been completely destroyed and its exact location could no longer be determined.

Structure

The dimensions of the pyramid were never exactly determined, so they can only be estimated from the information in the Description de l'Egypte. On the basis of mastabas appearing in the map, Ćwiek calculated that the pyramid measured about 20 m (66 ft) on each side. He estimated that the incline was less than 50°. This would imply a height of less than 16 m (52 ft).

Age and purpose

Map of Athribis from the Description de l'Egypte (1823). The pyramid is at the centre of the ruins, in the upper left corner of crossroads.

It is only possible to speculate about the age and purpose of the pyramid, owing to the extremely sparse datable material. The Egyptologist Nabil Swelim[3][4] and the former director of the DAI in Cairo Rainer Stadelmann[5][6] connect it with a group of seven small step pyramids (Elephantine, Edfu South, el-Kula, Naqada, Saujet el-Meitin [de], Seila and Sinki [de]) which were built at the end of the 3rd Dynasty (reigned c. 2686-c. 2613 BCE) or the start of the 4th (reigned ca. 2613 –ca. 2494 BC).

Stadelmann sees these structures as local instantiations of royal power, comparable to the Kaiserpfalz-system of the Holy Roman Empire, while Swelim instead suggests a religious purpose. However, the inclusion of the pyramid of Athribis within this group is not firmly demonstrated by either scholar. In fact it derives only from the fact that the hypothetical dimensions of the pyramid are similar to those of the other seven pyramids, while there are major factors arguing against the identification: firstly, the engraving in the Description depicts the Pyramid as a true pyramid, not a step pyramid like the other seven; secondly, the other seven pyramids are built of stone, while the pyramid of Athribis was made of brick. On account of this last point in particular, Ćwiek criticised Swelim and Stadelmann's inclusion of this pyramid in that group. He further considered it unlikely that a brick structure would have survived in such good condition from the Old Kingdom until the beginning of the 19th century. In his opinion, therefore, it was probably a pyramid from the 13th Dynasty (reigned 1803–1649 BC), if not the Late Period (c. 664 BC – 332 BC).[7]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Petrie did excavations at Athribis but does not mention the pyramid. What he does say is that within a block of 4th-6th Dynasty rock cut tombs at nearby Hagaresh, the 4th/5th Dynasty tomb of "Ka-cm-nofer" seem to model the internal structure of G1 at Giza. Petrie: 

The passages to these funeral chambers are peculiar, and the position of the coffins higher than the tomb chapels is also strange. The whole system seems to have been an imitation of the pyramid of Khufu, as we notice below....

The descending passage is common enough in tombs; but there is no example of the subsequent ascent, the only prototype of which is in the passages of the pyramid of Khufu. There are also details curiously like those in the pyramid. In the southern tomb the slope upward begins with a vertical face like the Grand Gallery; and the slope has a bench or ramp along both sides, like the gallery. In the northern tomb, though the slope merely has a vertical end, there is a groove on either wall, sloping down and up again, implying a passage sloping both ways, and reminding us of the groove cut in the wall of the Grand Gallery. The resemblance in apparently unimportant detail, and in the general idea of the passages and the square-cut massive coffins, connects these tombs so closely with the pyramid of Khufu, and with no other structure, that we must suppose Ka-em-nofer to have been familiar with that building, and to belong to that reign. This would agree well enough with the fine and bold style of the inscriptions.

800px-Pyramide_von_Athribis.jpg?20070703

Description de'Egypte, Volume 31, Planche 27 |Date=1823|

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.