It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence of Hebrew-America Exploration in 1000 B.C.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Recently I was doing some digging for a story regarding Leif Ericson when I came across something more interesting that I had not previously been aware of. It has been long established that Columbus was not the first "non-native" to become aware of the land that would become America some time later, as we know that the Vikings had visited some time before. For those who do not know, Leif was the son of Eric the Red, the Viking ruler that settled the village of Vestrybyggo and called the outlying area "Greenland" in order to attract settlers. What I found in my research threw me into a deeper delving of the issue. This article is what started it:
Saga of Ancient Hebrews
This mainly refers to a stone that was found in a dry creek bed in New Mexico containing the Ten Commandments in the original ancient Hebrew script. There are then obscure references to a particular tribe of Native Americans called the Yuchis, who, unlike all other tribes, observed a custom almost identical to the Hebrew's Festival of Booths. Most shocking of all, the names that they called in their dances were the Hebrew names for God. Suggests contact with the Ancient Hebrews.

"And king Solomon made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon" (I Kings 9:26-28).

As shown from the quotation, the site goes on to give evidence in support of the theory that this land was actually the legendary Ophir, from which Solomon recieved his gold.
Here is a paper written by the author Steve Collins regarding his opinion to the authenticity of many of these stones and their inscriptions. The beginning is devoted to a healthy defense of the Bible and it's historical value, but the rest in an interesting read.

George Morehouse, a geologist, studied it and concluded it is between 500 and 2000 years old, based on the weathered patina on the rock. However, the inscriptions have received periodic scrubbings, says Collins, and therefore some of the ancient evidence of weatherization could have been removed in the
process. Collins points out that the punctuation in the inscription matches that found in ancient Greek manuscripts of the fourth century. Dr. Barry Fell states that separation points found in the artifact date to as early as 1200 B.C.

Source
More writing to validate the authenticity of the finds.
This is a breakdown of the translation from the stone.

If there is any truth to what can be seen here, our accepted ideas about the sea worthiness of the ancient civilizations is altered dramatically, as are the conceptions of Native American history. I would like to get some opinions on this from some of the other ATS members.




posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Another site claims the Yuchis are of Chinese and Buddhist cultures.

www.1421.tv...



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 03:42 PM
link   
That rock in New Mexico is a definite fact (as far as being a rock that is written on in what appears to be proto-canaanite writing) because I live in NM and that rock isn't far from my aunt's house.

I have studied the origins and path of the Hebrew language and I am willing to say that I am certain it is of very old semitic origins. It is a part of the bedrock, too big to be taken there, so it was engraved right where it lay.

And when this rock first came into scrutiny of both scholars and Joe 6-pack alike, there really wasn't any knowledge or record, to draw from, about what then seemed to be a letters from various cultures which did not exist at the same point in time. But since then, more evidence has been found and studied, and our investigation into linguistic roots go much farther back, revealing something we didn't know--that this writing belongs to a certain point in time.

I don't have any references handy right now, but I will look as soon as possible and give you some links, but it has come up, in my own research only just very recently, that this language isn't one that belongs to any certain culture or area--it has been found on all continents. (except probably Antartica, of course)

Now, that was all what I know by reading the work of true scholars and researchers. I'm a pretty avid investigator, but I'm no authority except second-hand and dependent upon the labor of others.

But I will tell you, just for fun, what my personal ideas are, since this latest discovery of my own, regarding this language all over the globe...but it's not provable, just something to think about if you want to.

I think that this rock in NM is way older than they think--and the rest of the finds, as well. I think this was the language of the people before the last ice age melted. (some call it Atlantis, the christians say Adam and Eve, and Stitchen fans know it as being of the Nephilim etc) I just call it 'ante deluvian' or the 'last age'. Meaning before the holocene period which is understood as being the last 13,000 or so years.

Have you heard of the Anasazi culture of NM? They left us Chaco Canyon, if I recall correctly. We don't know much of them at all, but to me, they surely seem part of that special group of ancient cultures that seem to stand out as being more advanced or somehow smarter than what we believe to have been their peers in the timeline.
But I don't really think our timeline assumptions are correct, for various reasons which don't really bear dissertation right here. Others of this sort include the Mayans and the Egyptians (the ones who built the Sphinx, perhaps) and even those of ancient
Mesopotamia and Greece.

For example, they have found evidence that the people of Thera (Santorini volcanic exctinction of the Minoan culture) had indoor plumbing systems!! Flushing toilets! We know the Romans had similar, but if I recall, it was more like a septic drainage system, not that clean and not so great of a thing, compared with plumbing that facilitates flushing toilets!!

These special cultures seem to have a few things in common, such as knowledge of the heavens and other sciences which we have only just evolved to the point of near-mastery. And of course, another enigma are those strange and anomalous discoveries every so often, such as the 'bagdad' battery....

'Let's make believe' so I can present a picture that sometimes comes to my mind:

WHAT if the melting of the ice caps, for whatever reason, occured in the past on a more global scope, before tectonics had built the Himalayas and Andes so high...and that it happened as they think it did, from ice core sample evidence--in the space of about 50 years--and since it had been the ice age but yet very nice around the equator, and so all the people lived around there, but those places were also very low lands when the seas started to rise--and the people left for higher ground--but they left their cities and towns and technological advancements behind--

What evidence would this sort of situation leave behind for us to examine now? An d where would that evidence be and when would it likely be found? What would it appear to be?

Now, let's put our present world in that same situation, with a few tweaks for reality's sake.

And then project ourselves about 13,000 years into the future, to the time when a new people have rebuilt our world into something very likely much different, yet in many ways quite the same.

What would they find and what would they think about it?



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by EdenKaia
containing the Ten Commandments in the original ancient Hebrew script. There are then obscure references to a particular tribe of Native Americans called the Yuchis, who, unlike all other tribes, observed a custom almost identical to the Hebrew's Festival of Booths. Most shocking of all, the names that they called in their dances were the Hebrew names for God. Suggests contact with the Ancient Hebrews.


There's a few problems with that.

The first problem is that the Yuchis have told (and written) their history, and none of it matches any of the above (though it does match a "first people" concept that they entered the country some 10,000-15,000 years ago) :
tennesseeencyclopedia.net...
www.yuchi.org...

The Yuchis lived in the eastern part of the US. They never lived in New Mexico.
hjem.tele2adsl.dk...

They apparently fled to Florida and joined the Seminole. Their language is almost extinct:
www.indigenouspeople.net...

There's not any suggestions of Hebrew dance or traditions or names of deities in their culture (not before they were "civilized", at any rate) :
www.ewebtribe.com...


As shown from the quotation, the site goes on to give evidence in support of the theory that this land was actually the legendary Ophir, from which Solomon recieved his gold.

The areas where the Yuchi lived were not rich in gold. Gold's mined in the Denver area and in California. They had some gold, but not the quantities attributed to Solomon. Given that Ophir also sent sandalwood, precious stones, ivory, apes, and peacocks every year to Solomon, the writer must be very mistaken in the identification.


Here is a paper written by the author Steve Collins regarding his opinion to the authenticity of many of these stones and their inscriptions.


Here's the stone:
www.econ.ohio-state.edu...

Now, take a moment to look at the rock. Notice carefully the color of the letters. The whiter the letters are, the younger the inscription is.

Above it is another rock with graffiti on it. There's a '73 in the upper right hand corner that is darker than the inscription. If this is an ancient inscription, why are the letters lighter than the stone itself? Old petroglyphs (even scrubbed ones) fade to the same color of the rock. They don't get lighter.


George Morehouse, a geologist, studied it and concluded it is between 500 and 2000 years old, based on the weathered patina on the rock. However, the inscriptions have received periodic scrubbings, says Collins, and therefore some of the ancient evidence of weatherization could have been removed in the
process.


Again, scrubbings would leave the inscription the same color as the rock... not a brighter white. The only way to make them brighter/whiter than the rock itself is for the inscription to be very new.


Collins points out that the punctuation in the inscription matches that found in ancient Greek manuscripts of the fourth century.


Is he being coy? 400-500 AD, perhaps, but not 300-400 BC.
www.nyu.edu...


Dr. Barry Fell states that separation points found in the artifact date to as early as 1200 B.C.

How do you suppose he came up with that date? Ancient manuscripts do show spacing but don't show period-as-full-stop. That concept came about after 300 AD.


If there is any truth to what can be seen here, our accepted ideas about the sea worthiness of the ancient civilizations is altered dramatically, as are the conceptions of Native American history.


Once again, we have a war of information and disinformation. On one side is a group of literalist Christians. On the other side is the history of the Yuchi tribe as written and stated by the Yuchis themselves.

So, you ask if I believe the information and artifact promoted by a group of Christians who believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old. The answer is a resounding "no." I believe, instead, that the Yuchi history and tales and legends and stories collected from them throughout the centuries are all correct and that the Yuchis did know the difference between living in Tennessee and living in Oklahoma.

And I think the rock doesn't lie... the patina says it's a very young inscription.


(note: if you didn't know it, rock art IS one of my research areas.)

[edit on 13-6-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
The first problem is that the Yuchis have told (and written) their history, and none of it matches any of the above

It is a fact that on the 15th day of the Harvest month, the Yuchi participate in a ceremony that is very similar to the Hebrew "Festival of Booths". The signifigance of this is debatable, but the ritual dance takes place, nevertheless. This is the only relevant fact that is used in reference to that tribe, as their mention was only a smaller part of the greater picture of this theory of Hebrew settlement.


The Yuchis lived in the eastern part of the US. They never lived in New Mexico. They apparently fled to Florida and joined the Seminole.

Did you not read through that initial link at all?

He showed me samples of pottery uncovered from the waters around the Bahamas, and told me of Indian legends, including that of the Yuchis, stating they had migrated to the area of Florida and Georgia from the region of the Bahamas.

I never said that the Yuchi ever lived in New Mexico. The only reason that they were included in my post at all is to give a brief overview and synopsis of what the link included. The Yuchi's involvement was only to demonstrate how they might have had contact with the Hebrews, and thus adopted some of their ceremonies and rituals into their own culture by association.


There's not any suggestions of Hebrew dance or traditions or names of deities in their culture


Dr. Cyrus Gordon, of Brandeis University in Boston, was privileged to sit in on one of the fall harvest festivals of the Yuchi Indians, and listened to their chants, songs, and sacred ceremonies. An expert in Hebrew, Minoan, and many Middle Eastern languages, he was incredulous. As he listened, he exclaimed to his companion, "They are speaking the Hebrew names for God!"

So, in your opinion, this college professor was only making this story up for the sake of a theory? One which states that the earth is only six thousand years old?

So, you ask if I believe the information and artifact promoted by a group of Christians who believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old. The answer is a resounding "no."
What inspired you to make this sort of assessment of the motives behind this man's experience? As well as the others who gave their expert opinions on the stone itself. Being Christian suddenly rules out any education or useful knowledge they may have? Just curious, I didn't quite understand that one.


The areas where the Yuchi lived were not rich in gold. Gold's mined in the Denver area and in California. They had some gold, but not the quantities attributed to Solomon. Given that Ophir also sent sandalwood, precious stones, ivory, apes, and peacocks every year to Solomon, the writer must be very mistaken in the identification.

You keep refering to the Yuchi as if the entire theory of an early Hebrew migration rests upon their shoulders, as you seem to think my post suggests. Again, the Yuchi are only a small piece of the puzzle, a lesser point on a grander model. I suggest you read through that link I provided. You seem to have misunderstood the point of what I was posting. The evidence provided on the issue of Ophir was not to suggest that the Yuchi lived on the land where the gold was mined, at least not directly. But rather it suggests that Ophir was North America itself, in its entirely, as well, perhaps, as the outlying lands off of the eastern seaboard. This would account for where the items you listed might have come from. In a passage from Plutarch, he discusses his discovery of an ancient manuscript in the ruins of Carthage that refered to a "passage across the Atlantic". He then goes on to talk of greeks that "settled the land and married into tribes of barbarians." Did not Rome destroy Carthage and send the remaining ships fleeing in fear of fires? It is well known that many of these greeks were Danite Israelites, which might explain the Hebrew artifacts and inscriptions found in the North American regions.


If this is an ancient inscription, why are the letters lighter than the stone itself? Old petroglyphs (even scrubbed ones) fade to the same color of the rock. They don't get lighter.

www.nawcwpns.navy.mil..." border=0>

This is an image of a stone taken from the Coso Range Canyons that is several thousand years old. Notice the markings are dramatically lighter than the stone on which they are drawn.
www.advantour.com..." border=0>

Here is another one from Cholpon-Ata dated to the second millenium B.C. Again, the markings are much lighter than the stone they are depicted on. I suggest the difference comes in both the type of stone used to make the inscription, or perhaps color and pliability of the stone being marked. Either way, these examples are far older than the suggested date of the stone in question here, thereby posing a new question. As you, yourself said, old petroglyphs eventually fade to the color of the rock. But how long would that process take, and will it vary according to different rock consistancies and locations? The stone we are refering to was found in a dry creek bed in a heavily wooded area. This would have sheltered it fairly well from weathering.


Again, scrubbings would leave the inscription the same color as the rock... not a brighter white. The only way to make them brighter/whiter than the rock itself is for the inscription to be very new.

Admitting I am no great rock expert, I would actually think that the markings would become lighter the further down you went, considering that the lower areas are where the deepest scoring would have been, free from any outside influences of dust and moisture.



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Here's the stone:
www.econ.ohio-state.edu...

Now, take a moment to look at the rock. Notice carefully the color of the letters. The whiter the letters are, the younger the inscription is.


Byrd~knowing, as I do, that you are not one to say you know about a topic because of your studies, unless it is true, I do have to point something out in regard to this statement. I, myself, know little about rocks in this kind of way, but as I said in an earlier post, this rock is in my neck of the woods, in NM and I've lived here practically all my life. I have explored and explored all over the state--it is a really cool place to live, IMO. I've seen a lot of rock art around the area, and while I really am clueless about most of it, I can tell you, for a fact, as an eyewitness, that this is actually the norm around here. The rocks are blackish and the inscriptions are always lighter. And there are some places they've estimated age--I don't know how accurate they are, but they might serve as a baseline for you, somehow..

A lot of the petroglyphs are scribed into basalt, and in Los Lunas I know this is also the case, although I don't know which lava field or what era--there a lot of them all over the place. Two areas of igneous rock I know to name are El Malpais (not basalt) and the Rio Grande Rift Valley (various basalts I think but ??).

Here are some links with photos of the petroglyphs around here:

This following one offers photos of various type rocks, some like you would expect, and some like I am familar with seeing
Pictographs and Petroglyphs
Three Rivers Petroglyph Site
NM State Parks

I also know, that for this particular rock in question, a lot of people rub chalk in the graving so that it will show up good in pictures---and we get very little rain here. Very little. But--at the state monuments where there are similar contrasting colors on these petroglyphs, I don't think that chalk is involved--since they are protected and governed by NPS or NM State Parks, and this so-called decalogue in Los Lunas is on private land.

What all that means, I haven't a clue. Except that I don't think it means as much in this area as it might somewhere else, regarding just how old it is. But then again, I know little about rocks except what I've seen.



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 07:48 AM
link   
I would vote for Eden Kaia's speculations as to the origin of the Los Lunas Rock inscriptions despite the contrary stance based on fine tuning the patina. I share the idea that Semitic Phoenicians working for Solomon sailed to the New World searching for Gold. Barry Fell was an erudite Harvard expert on ancient rock inscriptions who had studied Phoenician inscriptions in the Mediterranean area in the 1960s. Studying inscriptions from the site in New hampshire called "Mystery Hill" he gave his opinion that the inscriptionswere definitely of Phoenician origin. The site was dated to 1600 BC. -As for New Mexico, those seafaring Phoenicians were capable I'm sure of sailing up the Rio Grande. Los Lunas is near that river.



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Will answer other remarks later, but two quick comments here:

Look at the original stone... it was in a "mix of Hebrew and Greek."

The Greek letters used are vowels. Hebrew didn't actually use any vowels until fairly recently and no Jew would have used them (they did have vowels for the initial letters of names and things (such as "Adam".... but they spelled it "Adm").

The second thing is that the Decalogue (10 commandments) are not something that the Jewish religion worships. Christians do, but to the Jews it is only ten of several hundred commandments in the Old Testament and some branches of Judaism still obey every single one of them. That would have been a time when this practice was in force... writing only the decalogue would be equivalent to "writing down the laws of the State of Texas" and stopping with "thou shalt not shoot thy neighbor and thou shalt not speed."

There are inscriptions left by Jews that date to several of those ages (not in America; in the Middle East) and we can look at those as well. They do not, however, use Greek vowels mixed in the writing.

Quick re -- on the rocks. Patina of different rocks varies (I have some nice photos of basalt inscriptions from California in my collection), which is why you look at the rocks around it when judging brightness.

And Fell is a biologist, not a linguist. His theories about languages are similar to many we see here, where he cherry picked a set of words from one language and matched them with another language and declared the two related (real linguists use root words and grammar structure and a bunch of other things.) Under Fell's methodology, I could prove that modern Hawai'ian is actually a branch of Russian.

He is (or was), however, a very good biologist.

[edit on 14-6-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 01:04 PM
link   
I personally don't think it is a Hebrew inscription. My brain and my gut both say it is not. That doesn't mean I'm right, but I've been interested in this rock for various reasons for a number of years.

Try as I might, I just cannot imagine the Rio Grande river-which in some places, and near this rock, is often little more than a mud bog at any given time of the year, accomodating any sort of vessel-especially a sea-faring one. No doubt water conditions in New Mexico might have been different 1000 years ago, but it doesn't seem likely. Those who study the numerous indian cliff dwellings and ruins around the state say there was a sudden and (so far) unexplained 'exodus' of many sites sometime within the last millenia, and the usual guess is drought and living conditions that became severe as far as their sustenance from the land. So I'm thinking that probably the Rio Grande has not been truly 'grande' for some time. Granted, before they built Elephant Butte dam, the river flowed more vigorously, especially during the spring thaw of the rockie mountains, but it is a wide river, not a deep one, even by just evaluating the path that it has carved in the landscape over the centuries.

Also, the same experts say that this area has been inhabitated by various indigenious tribes for the last 10,000 to 12,000 years. And there are missions and other spanish ruins in association with the native ruins that date back to around 4 or 5 centuries ago when the Spaniards came in search of the 7 Cities of Cibola (or 7 Cities of Gold).
When they dig and discover the evidence left behind, wouldn't there be some sort of evidence, during all that time, of a new and very different kind of people moving in?
It seems to me that there would be something, a change, however subtle, would certainly be evidenced. Not every place in the US has such a known history, but even what we know is very little. But excavations of community sites reveals much more than rock inscriptions do, and that's where I think there would have to be some
supporting evidence found to make this a sound theory.

The other thing conflict with this theory is the language assumed to be 'ancient hebrew.' Epigraphy has one of the less established and filled out timelines, and even one year can represent a 'moment in time,' as it were, that a language was being used in any given area in a particular form. Our languages morph and evolve along with the people who give them life. It's fascinating, to me, but not at all definitive most of the time, and so many have been eager to find some translation over the years, with this rock, that I'm not sure there are any impartial outcomes. The first was the 10 commandments, but I have a book that has Dixie Perkin's translation and she decided it was Greek and her translation is far different. But when she did it, it was felt she had cracked the mystery of the rock. Then another translator comes along--same thing, far different outcome, and so on...

Steve Collins' site states:

The inscription uses Greek tau, zeta, delta, and kappa (reversed) in place of their Hebrew counterparts taw, zayin, daleth, and caph, indicating a Greek influence, as well as a post-Alexandrian date, despite the archaic form of aleph used.


If aleph is archaic, then the Greek letters are more than likely not what they appear to be. Family tree of linguistic roots. Greek comes along at a far later time than when the archaic original ox head's aleph was in use. The idea of Pheonician/Hebrew seafarers coming here and leaving an inscription with the archaic aleph and the Greek figures reversed, doesn't seem to make too much sense, even allowing for all the strange anomalies that are possible when considering linguistics. And why reversed? That's odd, I think.

This is a reliable site, as far as Hebrew is concerned: AHRC. And there is an estimated time frame given as well as an illustrated table comparing 4 different stages of the Hebrew alphabet's evolution.

This page has the inscription in black and white. And this page has a lot of good information and comparisons of ancient alphabets and some good points made in the text.

Definitely it is not masoretic Hebrew or Samaritan hebrew. The dots between the sentences are odd.

Looking at the phoenician alphabet, or even ancient Hebrew, compared with the rock, itself, it looks to me like is needs to be turned 90degrees or maybe flipped horizontally. I don't think it is being studied from the right direction. Especially since the suspected Greek characters are 'reversed.' See if you see what I'm talking about, with the last two links I posted above.

[edit on 6/14/2006 by queenannie38]



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38
When they dig and discover the evidence left behind, wouldn't there be some sort of evidence, during all that time, of a new and very different kind of people moving in?

I'm not entirely sure that they would have been moving in. If we go along the theory of Solomon's travelers coming to collect specimens for the King, then they would not have remained for longer than they would have needed to, and even then the visits would have been few and far between. If we assume that Plutarch is correct, and Greek refuges from Carthage settled here and married into the various tribes, their own language would have soon been forgotten amidst the cultural change. There just would not have been enough of their own people to validate continuing on in the Greek custom. I believe this is why we see very few clues to indicate they had been there; they were just absorbed into the Native American way of life.



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 05:58 PM
link   
QueenAnnie managed to cut to the chase on some of the research I'd intended to do -- the question of what those letters are (they looked odd to me, too) and looking closer at what letters were in which alphabet.

There's a couple of other things there, too. If you look at the rock, it shows punctuation (periods after the sentences) -- but if you look at Jewish manuscripts from the 14th century and earlier, you will see that periods are not used (this was only done in more modern times).
rylibweb.man.ac.uk...


The issue of "why would they write the 10 commandments" is a very important one, and in fact one of the biggest signs that this is a latter day fake.

Judaism doesn't see the "10 commandments". They aren't "rules" but rather "categories of law" (like we have "criminal justice" and "civil justice" and "military justice"). There are 613 laws given in the Bible that the Jews uphold.
www.jewfaq.org...

Furthermore, if you look at the stone inscription and if you piece it out, it becomes pretty clear that what's being shown is the PROTESTANT version of the 10 commandments. The Catholic version is, yes, different... and the Jewish version of "the 10 divisions of the law" is different than either of those.


The agreed-upon translation of the text on the stone (taken from Fell) :
'I am Yahweh your God that brought you out of the lands of Egypt.'
1. You shall not have any other gods besides me.
2. You shall not make for yourself any graven image.
3. You shall not take the name of Yahweh in vain.
4. Remember the day of the Sabbath, to keep it holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother, so that your days may be
long on the land which Yahweh your God is giving to you.
6. You shall not murder.
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not testify against your neighbor as a false witness.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor anything of your
neighbor's.

www.asis.com...

That's the Protestant version of the 10 commandments. The 10 commandments weren't grouped like that until after 1700.

The Wikipedia page adds more to what I've said here and shows the different versions. There is also a picture of a Jewish copy of the Decalogue dated 1768. Please note that it has no punctuation, even at that late date. Hebrew didn't get punctuation until the past few hundred years.

[edit on 15-6-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Headed off to dinner... quick comments here and then back later.


Originally posted by EdenKaia

Originally posted by Byrd
The first problem is that the Yuchis have told (and written) their history, and none of it matches any of the above

It is a fact that on the 15th day of the Harvest month, the Yuchi participate in a ceremony that is very similar to the Hebrew "Festival of Booths". The signifigance of this is debatable, but the ritual dance takes place, nevertheless.


Have you looked at what the Festival of Booths is? I didn't find a single description of a ceremony where they took an 8 day period at harvest, constructed a temporary dwelling for an 8 day period, constructed special implements of plant to wave in the cardinal directions and at the zenith and nadir, inviting special guests into the booth, bless and light candles, make bundles of four species of plants that have Biblical references, etc, etc.
home.aol.com...


I never said that the Yuchi ever lived in New Mexico. The only reason that they were included in my post at all is to give a brief overview and synopsis of what the link included. The Yuchi's involvement was only to demonstrate how they might have had contact with the Hebrews, and thus adopted some of their ceremonies and rituals into their own culture by association.

Sorry... this is a VERY sore point with me. We work so hard to save the culture of the people and to record it for future generations. I'd just come off some pages where people took "Yuchi are Hebrews" for the truth and it just stirred my temper.


There's not any suggestions of Hebrew dance or traditions or names of deities in their culture


So, in your opinion, this college professor (Dr. Cyrus Gordon) was only making this story up for the sake of a theory? One which states that the earth is only six thousand years old?

Nope. But I'm suggesting that someone ELSE made it up.
www.nyu.edu...

You see, I looked up Dr. Gordon's papers. He never wrote about the Yuchi -- and such a monumental discovery would have had him not only exclaiming excitedly, but writing to colleagues about it and writing about it. Scholars have a drive to know (you yourself know this drive) and to write. IF it had been true, there would be entries under this search:
scholar.google.com...

(more later!)



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   
Hello all,

I've studied the Nascan figures for over 10 years, most of them are formed by scraping the top soil away, or laying out stones. But some are carved on rock, like the (so called astronaut). It is not an astronaut, by the way.

If, in taking a photo of this figure, one should use various polarized red or yellow or blue filters - you'll find there are images below. At the time I discovered this of the Nascan figures, I was also in contact with some people in the Canadian Ministry of Culture, Heritage & Archaeology in British Columbia; and I mentioned it to them.

Lo and behold - they'd discovered it as well on some Canadian NW native rock art.

I don't know about the rock in New Mexico, but if anyone has the opportunity they could try the filter thingie. This may not be as far fetched as it sounds - because there is a cultural link between the Nascan figures and the Blithe (giant) intaglios.

www.unexplainedearth.com...

bc
.\



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 03:57 AM
link   
I don't think it's made by hebrews from an ancient era, but I do think it is a curious anomaly.

Perhaps it was made by messianic jews immigrating to America at some point in the recent era, and they decided to make this sort of thing as a monument. *shrugs*
There's got to be some reason why someone made it, I highly doubt someone would go through all the effort of translating the 10 commandments into aramaic, and then scratching it onto a rock just to be cool and show off to their friends in a sort of "Alex wuz here" sort of way.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 04:20 AM
link   
I have for some time been interested in ancient civilizations and such. About 5 years ago I read a book called "The Hiram Key" (I cannot remember who the authors were) which said something along the lines that ancient peoples travelled to a land called Merica! This was a long, long time ago - certainly long before Columbus et al. Also, have any of you seen the Piri Reis map? It is ancient but nobody knows who drafted it originally and shows America in detail. See here for more details: www.prep.mcneese.edu/engr/engr321/preis/piri_r~1.htm



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 04:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by LovingSoul
I have for some time been interested in ancient civilizations and such. About 5 years ago I read a book called "The Hiram Key" (I cannot remember who the authors were) which said something along the lines that ancient peoples travelled to a land called Merica! This was a long, long time ago - certainly long before Columbus et al. Also, have any of you seen the Piri Reis map? It is ancient but nobody knows who drafted it originally and shows America in detail. See here for more details: www.prep.mcneese.edu/engr/engr321/preis/piri_r~1.htm


History tells us, and has done for years, that the name of America came from one Amerigo Vespucci, a Florentine transatlantic explorer who was a navigator with Christopher Columbus in 1499, and the first geographer to realise that the Americas were separate continents.

I'm not sure about the Hiram Key, as I have not read it, but considering the timeframe involved in the naming of the continent, the reference to Merica can only be an odd coincidence, if it even refers to the North American continent at all. If you own the book, please see if there is a reference of what language the word is formed in. This might shed some light on a translation for what place was actually being refered to. The above external source is from a paper debating the original source of the person America was actually named for. Either way you may be swayed, the naming of the continent was in no way an "ancient" occurance. Below is the source link for that paper, in case you were interested.
Origin of America Name



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Thanks for the info. There is, as always, many variations of "the truth" to choose from. I found The Hiram Key very interesting and would recommend it to anyone who is interested. I found many pages relating to the book on Google. BTW the authors are Christopher Knight and Robert Lomas. The main focus of the book is the origins of freemasonry and basically re-writing the story of Jesus. Incredible reading! See: www.robertlomas.com... for a full explanation.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Just to attempt to address the question of whether it would have been impossible to navigate the Rio Grande in prehistoric times. I think we have to allow the (theoretic) Phoenicians arriving at the American coasts the necessary insight to not try navigating such an inland waterway except probably during the Spring run-off. Back then there wouldn't have been a lot of upstream tapping at places like Santa fe, Pojoaque, or wherever that there is now, and I wouldn't extrapolate present water tables and river levels to those times. The picture probably was different then, and it is conceivable to me at least that the Rio Grande was navigable back then.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Well, if you wanted to date the rock you would have to take some charcoal/ash stuck in the petina on the inside of the carved letters. If there were any campfires burning when it was being carved some of the residue would collect inside the letters, and you can carbon date that.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
Why is it hard to accept that people might have populated the Americas after it broke away from the main continent, other than crossing a very freezing cold ice bridge way up at the Artic Circle? Surely the usual explanation of the Artic crossing is far more difficult to take seriously as few could manage it today with specialised equipment, whereas we know there was trading going on between ancient Egypt and the Americas because of things found such as the mummies with coc aine traces, and similar building complexes all over the world that date back many thousands of years.

Either that or you have to accept that the current type of human species first evolved in Africa from monkeys, then migrated out from there, and some eventually became Eskimos - then they went to the Americas, and no-one in Europe knew that anyone at all did that until they went to the New World in the 1400s.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join