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 -

Great Deception - Riddle of Britain


The Puzzler

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

The earliest extant gospel dates from around the time of Constantine so it does lend some credence to that argument. 

There's not a lot of evidence (or, at least, evidence I'm aware of) that points to Constantine being particularly Christian -- with the exception of Catholic dogma, which took a pretty serious hit in the 15th Century when the Donation of Constantine was proven, via the new study of paleography, to be a fake. A very bad fake. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine). Some people had thought it was a fake since the 11th Century. 

Many Early Medieval historians have suggested that Constantine was basically able to see the way the wind was blowing for Christianity and "adopted" it to earn favor and respect from a large minority group with a great following, particularly in the army, during the Civil War he was fighting at the time. Previously, he was religiously involved in the cult of Sol Invictus, from which Christianity had already borrowed many themes and motifs, so it was familiar territory for him.

I believe the earliest forms of the Gospel were known before Constantine's time in the form handed down to us -- I'm thinking here  particularly of what's called the Chester Beatty Papyrus, dated to the third century, about 100 years before Constantine. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chester_Beatty_Papyri), which contains recognizable text of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, in the order generally subscribed to in Western Christianity -- i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Acts. I don't feel like the idea of Constantine corrupting/forging the texts of Christianity decades before he was born is a particularly tenable idea.

Also, there were a /lot/ of Christians, the majority of them /not/ Catholic, in the fourth century. The idea that even an emperor could alter texts to favor a historical conspiracy and changing the root story of Christianity and not one person, not even his enemies, would mention it, not even in passing*, is also not particularly tenable. The Orthodox church representing the Eastern, more powerful, theologically and politically, half of the Empire, probably wouldn't consider Constantine a saint (called "Equal-to-the-Apostles") should he have tried to re-write their texts and history for them.

Additionally, in the Eastern Christian traditions, which have longer, more documented, and more dependable transmission histories than the Latin church, since they relied on texts in Aramaic and Syriac texts, are virtually identical to the Western versions in their texts of the Gospels, nor do they show any evidence of an alternate textual tradition that a forging Constantine would make necessary.

--Jaylemurph

*And here I would point to Procopius' Secret History, from the sixth century, as an example of just how scurrilously b****y imperial enemies could be (and still have their texts survive to the present).

Edited by jaylemurph
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Piney said:

The tied the losers to the Villanova Culture..... from the Po Valley?

Yes, that's where I find a multitude of everything including a rendition of the Eridanus River being the Po. The myth of the (Phaethon) impact on Saaremaa via a proto Celtic migration to the lower Continent ends up in the Po Valley amongst the Villanovans. Note cremation, particularly in urns, ie; the earlier Urnfield Culture.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, The Puzzler said:

Yes, that's where I find a multitude of everything, access to the Alps (Otzi is a K, my cousin lol) the Raeti and all associated Gallic/Brittanic, Northern types, including a rendition of the Eridanus River being the Po. The myth of the (Phaethon) impact on Saaremaa via a proto Celtic migration to the lower Continent ends up in the Po Valley amongst the Villanovans. Note cremation, particularly in urns, ie; the earlier Urnfield Culture. The Po is the core, for sure.

It's requoted me, what's with the UM new and improved format? It's crappy. delete this copy if you feel the need. At least the OLB a was still at #3 after at least 18 months, man, felt like home.

 

Edited by The Puzzler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't know of this theory, but it sure didn't age gracefully... :rolleyes:

Quote

Convinced Atlantis was Britain he proclaimed that prior to 584 BC Caledonia (Scotland) was the original holy land and asked his readers to visualize groups of survivors migrating southwards from Atlantis and founding colonies named after their homeland districts of Israel, Egypt, and Greece - which to him were all originally located in Britain.

Where to start, really. Archaeologically, paleo-genetically, there is no break between 550 BC and 400 BC in any of the Mediterranean civilizations and none of them are closer related or getting closer related to Britain, not even among elites. And there is no such a shift for around 9000 BC either or any time else anywhere in prehistory or history. Ancient Greek and Roman are related to Anatolian. Egyptians and Phoenicians are related to Mesolithic Levantine people, Babylonian and neighbors to Iranian Mesolithic People. British island peoples are related Atlantic farmers, themselves related to Anatolian farmers and Western Europe hunters-gatherers + later pastoralists from the pontic steppes. They have been different people from... as long as there were people in Britain. No notable input of people came in from Britain to the near East, ever.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the Basques and Corsicans were the closest relation to the Anatolian farmers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Piney said:

I thought the Basques and Corsicans were the closest relation to the Anatolian farmers.

They are the closest, as mainland Greek and Italian had quite a few movement of people over the millennia, but generally speaking, Greeks and Italinas are much closer to Anatolian farmers than British ancient people.

Since I have more time now, here's a graph about the genetic relation between modern European, from Anthropology.net

Image associée

And a second one which gives more ancient genome compare to modern ones, it comes from this paper. British would be among the green dots of Western Europe, Natufians would be Levant and Egypt proto-Neolithic (somewhere in the middle of modern North African and Middle East), Aegean Neolithic and Anatolian Neolithic cluster together close to modern Sardinians. Ireland Neolithic is on the other side of the Sardinian from the Neolitic Anatolians, among other Neolithic Europeans tending towards Switzerland, Sweden and Western hunter-gatherers. However, modern Western Europeans are dragged closer to Eastern Europe than their ancestor, closer to the steppes ancient samples. Sardinians have little of the steppes ancestry, that's why they are the modern population closest to Anatolian farmers, although Neolithic Greece is closer to them than modern Sardinians.

2017_Fregel_Figure2A.jpg

Edited by Gingitsune
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gingitsune said:

I didn't know of this theory, but it sure didn't age gracefully... :rolleyes:

Where to start, really. Archaeologically, paleo-genetically, there is no break between 550 BC and 400 BC in any of the Mediterranean civilizations and none of them are closer related or getting closer related to Britain, not even among elites. And there is no such a shift for around 9000 BC either or any time else anywhere in prehistory or history. Ancient Greek and Roman are related to Anatolian. Egyptians and Phoenicians are related to Mesolithic Levantine people, Babylonian and neighbors to Iranian Mesolithic People. British island peoples are related Atlantic farmers, themselves related to Anatolian farmers and Western Europe hunters-gatherers + later pastoralists from the pontic steppes. They have been different people from... as long as there were people in Britain. No notable input of people came in from Britain to the near East, ever.

i have to assume you are talking mtdna because ydna says something completely different from almost everything you said.  there were no male farmers from the levant  or anatolia in briitain.  

a complete archive of the latest results from the paleolithic onward can be clicked through here....

note also that the middle eastern neolithic was largely accomplished by europeans 

Edited by cern
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cern said:

i have to assume you are talking mtdna because ydna says something completely different from almost everything you said.  there were no male farmers from the levant  or anatolia in briitain.  

a complete archive of the latest results from the paleolithic onward can be clicked through here....

note also that the middle eastern neolithic was largely accomplished by europeans 

I'm talking about autosomal DNA, the 22 non-sexual chromosome. mt-DNA and Y-DNA only follow one line on the pedigree chart, autosomal gives a much more comprehensive view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so are you saying that there were neolithic males in britain that were descended from neolithic males from anatolia? 

wiki

"autosomal tests usually report the ethnic proportions of the individual. These attempt to measure an individual's mixed geographic heritage by identifying particular markers, called ancestry informative markers or AIM, that are associated with populations of specific geographical areas. Geneticist Adam Rutherford has written that these tests "don’t necessarily show your geographical origins in the past. They show with whom you have common ancestry today."

Edited by cern
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30 October 2017 at 7:50 AM, Tatetopa said:

He seems like a precursor to L. Ron Hubbard, trying to spin a religion out of a science fiction book.

 

Nice link, thanks.

Hi, what sci-fi book do you think he took this idea from?

No worries for the link.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30 October 2017 at 8:06 AM, Tatetopa said:

Well I think the people that have made a life's study of it are pretty sure.

 

Is it strange?  To a Roman reporting, maybe even second hand, dialects may have seemed like the same language. 

 

There was a whole lot going on in Northern Europe we don't know much about.  Consider Skara Brae, and Callanish, the Chalk Horse and Stonehenge among other constructions.  There was travel, organization, skill, and the desire to build monuments for whatever reason, and big hill forts for defense.  I don't think it is the Levant or Troy or any other place but its own. Trying to make it into Atlantis or Troy or Jerusalem  is indeed putting Northern Europe in a box.  I would prefer to think it was the beneficial cultural contributions of my Neanderthal ancestors.  Of course, I have no basis for that either.

I agree, a whole lot going on, I also agree, there was travel and organisation, via Amber especially, to bring people and mythology down to the Mediterranean, even though I understand you may not agree witht the whole theory.

Edited by The Puzzler
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30 October 2017 at 10:21 AM, jaylemurph said:
Quote

There's not a lot of evidence (or, at least, evidence I'm aware of) that points to Constantine being particularly Christian -- with the exception of Catholic dogma, which took a pretty serious hit in the 15th Century when the Donation of Constantine was proven, via the new study of paleography, to be a fake. A very bad fake. (

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine). Some people had thought it was a fake since the 11th Century. 

Many Early Medieval historians have suggested that Constantine was basically able to see the way the wind was blowing for Christianity and "adopted" it to earn favor and respect from a large minority group with a great following, particularly in the army, during the Civil War he was fighting at the time. Previously, he was religiously involved in the cult of Sol Invictus, from which Christianity had already borrowed many themes and motifs, so it was familiar territory for him.[/quote]

Hi J, I'd say so, and... ?

Quote

I believe the earliest forms of the Gospel were known before Constantine's time in the form handed down to us -- I'm thinking here  particularly of what's called the Chester Beatty Papyrus, dated to the third century, about 100 years before Constantine. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chester_Beatty_Papyri), which contains recognizable text of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, in the order generally subscribed to in Western Christianity -- i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Acts. I don't feel like the idea of Constantine corrupting/forging the texts of Christianity decades before he was born is a particularly tenable idea.

Also, there were a /lot/ of Christians, the majority of them /not/ Catholic, in the fourth century. The idea that even an emperor could alter texts to favor a historical conspiracy and changing the root story of Christianity and not one person, not even his enemies, would mention it, not even in passing*, is also not particularly tenable. The Orthodox church representing the Eastern, more powerful, theologically and politically, half of the Empire, probably wouldn't consider Constantine a saint (called "Equal-to-the-Apostles") should he have tried to re-write their texts and history for them.

Additionally, in the Eastern Christian traditions, which have longer, more documented, and more dependable transmission histories than the Latin church, since they relied on texts in Aramaic and Syriac texts, are virtually identical to the Western versions in their texts of the Gospels, nor do they show any evidence of an alternate textual tradition that a forging Constantine would make necessary.[/quote]

Not tenable...? I beg to differ. 

 

Edited by The Puzzler
My editing sux.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, cern said:

so are you saying that there were neolithic males in britain that were descended from neolithic males from anatolia? 

wiki

"autosomal tests usually report the ethnic proportions of the individual. These attempt to measure an individual's mixed geographic heritage by identifying particular markers, called ancestry informative markers or AIM, that are associated with populations of specific geographical areas. Geneticist Adam Rutherford has written that these tests "don’t necessarily show your geographical origins in the past. They show with whom you have common ancestry today."

Oh course there were males in Britain that descended from Neolithic Anatolian. Even if they were replaced later by the pastoralists' sons doesn't mean they never existed or had no contribution to today's autosaomal gene pool of British Islands. ;)

From Eupedia, Genetic history of the British and the Irish

Quote

In other words, Megalithic structures like Stonehenge in Wiltshire, the Newgrange passage tombin County Meath, Ireland, or the Callanish Stones on the Isle of Lewis in Scotland were in all likelihood built by men belonging essentially to haplogroups G2a and I2a.

Megalithic mtDNA from Brittany is a typical blend of Mesolithic (H1, H3, U4, U5b, V) and Neolithic (H5, K1a, N1a, T2, X2) lineages, in direct continuity of the Cardium Pottery and Linear Pottery cultures. Consequently, Megalithic people were predominantly 
G2a and I2a people, probably with minorities of E-M78, R1b-V88 and T1a in southern Europe.

[...]

 

It is perhaps the wealth of Megalithic people that attracted, through the Beaker network, the Indo-European speakers from central Europe, and caused them to invade western Europe and destroy the Megalithic cultures that had lasted for several millennia. Equipped with bronze weapons and horses, these Indo-Europeans were not cereal farmers but cattle herders from the Pontic Steppe, north of the Black Sea. They had already conquered the Balkans, the Carpathians, Poland, Germany, Scandinavia and the Baltic countries between 4,000 and 2,800 BCE, causing the collapse of all the Chalcolithic and Neolithic cultures in those areas. The southern R1b branch had advanced from the Hungarian plain to Bohemia and Germany by 2500 BCE (presence of R1b confirmed by Lee at al. 2012), and continued its migration until the Atlantic coast, reaching Britain and western France by 2,200 BCE and Ireland by 2,000 BCE.

It is likely that these Proto-Celts who invaded the British Isles belonged to a great majority to the L21 subclade of R1b, as this haplogroup now makes up over two thirds of paternal lineages in Wales, Ireland and Highland Scotland. In fact, Cassidy et al. (2015) tested the genomes of three Bronze Age individuals from Rathlin Island in Ireland dating from between 1550 and 2000 BCE, and found out that they all belonged to R1b-L21 and were almost genetically indistinguishable from the genomes from the Unetice culture in Central Europe at the same period, confirming that a migration from central Europe to Ireland had brought R1b-L21 by 2,000 BCE. In contrast, Cassidy's team found that the genomes of the Neolithic inhabitants of Ireland were almost identical to those of other Neolithic farmers in Europe and did not carry Steppe ancestry.

From what I read, the Neolithic European farmers were already going through some bad harvest years, it seems steppes pastoralists were pushed out of their traditional land by the same bad weather and their land use was more profitable than crop growing in these times. So healthier and stronger, they had no problem to push their room for themselves in their new land.

 

 

10 hours ago, cern said:

wiki

"autosomal tests usually report the ethnic proportions of the individual. These attempt to measure an individual's mixed geographic heritage by identifying particular markers, called ancestry informative markers or AIM, that are associated with populations of specific geographical areas. Geneticist Adam Rutherford has written that these tests "don’t necessarily show your geographical origins in the past. They show with whom you have common ancestry today."

This quote apply for you and me trying to make sense of our 23andMe, Ancestry or FamilyTreeDNA results thinking in a genealogical timeframe. But since people have been moving around in Europe for millennia, it's hard to say where we get, say some Scandinavian signal even though there's no trace of them in our genealogy. Is it a modern migration which was not reported? Some viking colony in some of our ancestors area? Is it some Danish or Dutch fisherman or sailor who started a new life on the opposite shore? There's just no way find.

On the other hand, Mesolithic clusters are very characterist as people back then were isolated, mating with only themselves in pockets of small surviving human population. If you look at the second map I shared yesterday, the whole Western Europe is represent by the green dots, South Europe by blue dots and East Europe by purple dots. They cluster closer together than there ancestor from Neolithic Anatolia (green reverse triangles), European Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (diamond at the left of the graph) and pastoralists (pink squares around the lower). Trying to make sense of population movement between these modern population is meaningless.

But if we are to check from which Mesolithic population our DNA comes from, it become much easier.

2017_Fregel_Figure2A.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Puzzler said:

I agree, a whole lot going on, I also agree, there was travel and organisation, via Amber especially, to bring people and mythology down to the Mediterranean

Ok, We are in agreement on this point.  Interesting thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The Puzzler said:

Hi J, I'd say so, and... ?

I'm not commenting one way or the other on the main theory you presented. I just wanted to address something Sir W had posted about (the date of the oldest Gospel texts and the idea of Constantine changing Christian doctrine).

--Jaylemurph

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1 November 2017 at 2:57 PM, jaylemurph said:

I'm not commenting one way or the other on the main theory you presented. I just wanted to address something Sir W had posted about (the date of the oldest Gospel texts and the idea of Constantine changing Christian doctrine).

--Jaylemurph

Sure, no worries, good info.

What I did come across in a history mag I just bought, was, I didn't know this, that Constantine did actually come into the East from York, leaving Britain on his endeavour to become a Roman Emperor, eventually in the East, to have a larger sphere of control.

He killed the Roman lead and assumed control of the Empire, heading East to establish his own dogma.  Ruthless to say the least.

Just also wanted to say I've been without Internet since Halloween night, a violent storm blew up my internet modem, and a driver in my computer, I'll add more answer in detail when I check the posts out more, thanks.

Edited by The Puzzler
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

During the medieval period, Britons regarded Constantine as a king of their own people, particularly associating him with Caernarfon in Gwynedd. While some of this is owed to his fame and his proclamation as Emperor in Britain, there was also confusion of his family with Magnus Maximus's supposed wife Saint Elen and her son, another Constantine (WelshCustennin). In the 12th century Henry of Huntingdon included a passage in his Historia Anglorum that the emperor Constantine's mother was a Briton, making her the daughter of King Cole of Colchester.[311] Geoffrey of Monmouth expanded this story in his highly fictionalized Historia Regum Britanniae, an account of the supposed Kings of Britain from their Trojan origins to the Anglo-Saxon invasion.[312] According to Geoffrey, Cole was King of the Britons when Constantius, here a senator, came to Britain. Afraid of the Romans, Cole submitted to Roman law so long as he retained his kingship. However, he died only a month later, and Constantius took the throne himself, marrying Cole's daughter Helena. They had their son Constantine, who succeeded his father as King of Britain before becoming Roman Emperor.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

I can see where he has got some of this stuff from.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Puzzler said:

During the medieval period, Britons regarded Constantine as a king of their own people, particularly associating him with Caernarfon in Gwynedd. While some of this is owed to his fame and his proclamation as Emperor in Britain, there was also confusion of his family with Magnus Maximus's supposed wife Saint Elen and her son, another Constantine (WelshCustennin). In the 12th century Henry of Huntingdon included a passage in his Historia Anglorum that the emperor Constantine's mother was a Briton, making her the daughter of King Cole of Colchester.[311] Geoffrey of Monmouth expanded this story in his highly fictionalized Historia Regum Britanniae, an account of the supposed Kings of Britain from their Trojan origins to the Anglo-Saxon invasion.[312] According to Geoffrey, Cole was King of the Britons when Constantius, here a senator, came to Britain. Afraid of the Romans, Cole submitted to Roman law so long as he retained his kingship. However, he died only a month later, and Constantius took the throne himself, marrying Cole's daughter Helena. They had their son Constantine, who succeeded his father as King of Britain before becoming Roman Emperor.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great

I can see where he has got some of this stuff from.

My biological mother was named for Saint Elen. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2017 at 9:21 AM, The Puzzler said:

"According to some researchers the meteor arrived from the north-east."

Kaali Wiki - see above post

Kaali Crater, Estonia is circled with a possible debris field to Britain.

estonia to scotland2_edited-1.jpg

MS Paint can has functionality to draw straight lines, you don't have to use the spray paint feature for everything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, travelnjones said:

MS Paint can has functionality to draw straight lines, you don't have to use the spray paint feature for everything

Yeah, I was being lazy, I did that in PS, that's how bad it is, I could have put in way more effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi Puzz ...... I have seen that line extended to reach the region of south America ...intimating that the intense heat may have been the cause of not only the vitified forts in scotland ..... but may also have caused the vitrification of the ruins in Peru also .

http://unchartedruins.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/the-vitrified-ruins-of-ancient-peru.html

and the heat of the comet which caused the KALI craters , may also have created the cracks in the KALA SAYA sun gate at tiahuanaco....

hope you are fit and well my friend

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote
Over the last couple of decades, architectural historians such as Jean Pierre Protzen and Stella Nair have addressed the mystery of how a civilization with no knowledge of the wheel and which only possessed rudimentary copper tools and chisels could have quarried, transported, dressed and fitted enormous blocks of hard granite, porphyry and andesite stone with the almost supernatural precision that one can see in the ancient sites of Peru and Bolivia. [1,2]

No knowledge of the wheel???? Copper tools and chisels???? The stones were worked with harder stones and the wheel was used with toys but useless in a mountain environment. 

 and the article author has "vitrified" and "polished" confused......

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Passing Time said:

Hi Puzz ...... I have seen that line extended to reach the region of south America ...intimating that the intense heat may have been the cause of not only the vitified forts in scotland ..... but may also have caused the vitrification of the ruins in Peru also .

http://unchartedruins.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/the-vitrified-ruins-of-ancient-peru.html

and the heat of the comet which caused the KALI craters , may also have created the cracks in the KALA SAYA sun gate at tiahuanaco....

hope you are fit and well my friend

The curvature of the earth and the strength of gravity mean that the comet would have either skipped off into space or fallen to earth long before it crossed the ocean.  

Also, the vitrification is something that the people did.  The comet's heat didn't create craters.  Craters are the result of something hitting the earth.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good Kenemet...... i was aware that it was parts that broke off the comet , that caused the 9 craters in Saarama ......and not the heat......LOL......although the heat would have been tremendous.

At the estimated velocity of the comet at 1800 km per minute , and the distance from Kaali to Peru being approx 11,000 km .. it would only have taken around 6 minutes for it to have crossed the ocean.

From all the information i have , it is not possible people could have vitrified these rocks with the technology of the estimated time frame .

Edited by Passing Time
incorrect calculation
  • 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.