Native Americans, Celts and Ancient Transatlantic Travel, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 32 times

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:07 AM by Teeky

Interesting. I have read before that Vikings and Africans could have been here first also. The history of the Americas are a mystery, but so is ancient history as a whole. I pray that one day we will know the truth.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:13 AM by FIFIGI

I am sure all of you know this, but I'll through it in anyway.

How about similarities of facial features. These are scattered across Central America. Considered to by created by Olmecs, but if you look closely at what they look like

you will realise Africans had made contact with Americas before Vikings did

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:13 AM by pieman

reply to post by TruthTellist

i'm irish, this is the way the mac/o/ni thing works as i understand it. there are a few other irish people on ATS and someone may have a more concise deffinition.

first of all mac is the irish usage and mc is the scottish usage in modern times. it is a different way of noting the same word and seeing as neither ireland nor scotland had a written language as such the difference in spelling is local and arbitrary. scottish gaelic is simular to irish gaelic. the two are probably from the same root and are different from welsh and cornish.

mac means "son of", so uasually mac is used with a male first name. mac indicates a family decent through the father, but uasually where the father was famous enough to be known by his first name in the area. generally speaking mac in a name indicates a royal line but not as a hard rule. so "sean macdeirmuda" is "sean, son of diarmuid".

in the more general usage, a person is called by clan, using "o" for the male and "ni" for the female. so if you were from the clan of brian, a boy is called o brein and a girl is called ni brein. this designation could come from your father or your mothers side, depending on which clan was more powerful. it was used at your own discretion.

generally speaking the irish and scots didn't use surnames, as such, at the time of brendan, your name was used and if further identification were required as to your identity, it was provided by use of the clan name or the name of your father if it was widely known.

i don't think brendan would have had the same conclusion you did.

[edit on 24/10/08 by pieman]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:32 AM by FIFIGI

Originally posted by Teeky
Interesting. I have read before that Vikings and Africans could have been here first also. The history of the Americas are a mystery, but so is ancient history as a whole. I pray that one day we will know the truth.

The truth is there - mostly not hidden, you just need to shift your attention to it to grab it.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:34 AM by TruthTellist

reply to post by pieman

I already apologized for daring to mention it a couple of posts ago. I'll say it again: I'm sorry I pointed out the phonetic similarities. I won't do it anymore...

I guess there is no point in mentioning that although they allied themselves with the French against the English, they Allowed Irish missionaries and traders into their society - which led to their majority converting to Roman Catholicism and assimiliating of English/Irish culture.

This greatly enhanced their ability to negotiate with Great Britain, as they could read and write the language as well as the English could and had an almost parliamentary type system of governance, which earned them respect and aided treaty ratification as their representatives spoke with the authority of their Nation and who represented them via democratic processes.

Noble Savages Indeed. They had long ago relegated the mantle and power of Kings and Queens to mere symbols in favour of a proto-Republic, wher Women were equal Hence - 'matricarchial'

-they couldn't admit such a society existed, there would be riots back in England.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by TruthTellist]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:36 AM by Skyfloating

reply to post by TruthTellist

Why apologize? The similarities are noteworthy. Thats what we´re looking for here.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:43 AM by Teeky

reply to post by FIFIGI

You know some people argue that the Olmec statues are asian or half man half jaguar. Me personally I think they are African. But that bothers most people. Really I think America was probably a melting pot long before our current era. History needs to be retold, just like Pluto.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 04:55 AM by Cythraul

Superb thread as usual skyfloating.

I have no doubt that the world had been travelled and discovered long before the Vikings even. I'm inclined to accept two likely possiblities:

1) The Algonquin learned aspects of the Basque tongue when Basque Fishermen reached America (possibly in the 15th century A.D.).

2) Our notions of 'indo-european' linguistic roots must be rethought because there is a more global root for all languages, perhaps originating from an as-yet-unknown Antediluvian civilisation. Other widespread cultural elements, other than language, have exemplified uncanny similarities - serpent worship, the ouroboros snake/serpent eating its own tail, pyramids, shamanic tradition, geometry, art, star constellations etc. A common root to all the world's culture appears probable.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 05:19 AM by Helioflorae

reply to post by Teeky

I remember reading about the Olmec heads in a science magazine sometime last year. According to the article the heads are supposed to represent people with Down Syndrome, and that the Olmecs (for whatever reason) worshipped those with DS, possibly even as demigods, kings or whatever.

Now while this is certainly *possible* - 'cause hey, anything is - I have strong doubts about it. The magazine (Tieteen Kuvalehti) is mostly "pop-science" and I don't hold it in very high regard. I read it to amuse myself, basically

I tried looking for info on this online, having surely thrown out the magazine by now, but couldn't find much other than this article and this Wikipedia article. Apparently the theory didn't stick after all

The first article points out similarities between the Khoisan and San people, supporting the African migration to America. Note that at least the San (or otherwise known as Bushmen), according to my knowledge, are one of the oldest - if not *the* oldest - tribes on the planet today and were once much more widespread.

There's my contribution to this most interesting thread, and I hope it was useful

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Helioflorae]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 05:41 AM by Skyfloating

The Olmecs worshipped people with Down Syndrome?

Ive been an opponent of conventional pop science for a while now...and for good reason it seems.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 05:42 AM by Skyfloating

reply to post by Cythraul

If we put all of the info together we do have a case for common roots and alternative explanations of our origins.

Problem with modern universities is that they often dont work inter-disciplinary in exchange and comparison of data from various departments. That breeds its own kind of stupidity.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 05:52 AM by Helioflorae

reply to post by Skyfloating

Yes, but it seems to be a pretty popular trend among scientists/academics to attribute all these similarities to inherent traits in the human psyche. That, backed up with their impressive *theories*, is enough to impress most people. And yes, what you say is true. They're too rigid in the way they think and set in their ways...

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 07:00 AM by Heratix

OK ...dont know if you guys and gals can find any use in this info...there is an ancient Welsh myth of Madoc ab Owain Gwynedd discovering and setting up a colony in America....

Madoc

but i also read somewhere that St Patrick was actually a welsh slave captured and enslaved by the Irish....and that he made a number of journeys to the America`s in a coracle....i also found these sites...

Welsh Indians

more on Welsh Indians

i dont know if this is of any interest as well....but the ancient welsh langauge is not gaelic but Brythonic

can you guys with knowledge of languages find any links there?

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 07:34 AM by Merriman Weir

Originally posted by TruthTellist
reply to post by pieman

I already apologized for daring to mention it a couple of posts ago. I'll say it again: I'm sorry I pointed out the phonetic similarities. I won't do it anymore...

Apparently, I'm on your ignore list so you won't actually read this, but I'm posting for the sake of in thread clarity and consistency.

My point regarding the use of Mc and Mac, certainly during the time at St Brendan sailed is that a male-based familial naming system such a this goes some way to undermine your point about:

St Brendan sailed from Ireland, where everyone was predominately named 'Mc' or 'Mac' and whose culture was traditionally heavily influenced by Matriarchal hierarchies.

So.... Saint Brendan had sailed from a country of Mc's and Mac's, only to find another matriarchal culture who called themselves the Mic Mak,

Names beginning with Mc and Mac shouldn't really be used in any context regarding matriarchal culture as obviously matriarchal culture didn't influence that and neither should a 5th century Christian monk. What in the name of Lord Krondar would St Brendan have known about a matriarchal culture?

That's not even taking into consideration the point that the jury is actually still out whether St Brendan actually landed in North America anyway.

[edit on 24-10-2008 by Merriman Weir]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 08:39 AM by netron

interesting thread. since i'm irish, i'd like to throw this one into the mix - did you know that native americans sent famine relief to the irish during the irish famine of the 1840s?

www.uwm.edu...

"In 1847, midway through the Irish famine, a group of Choctaws collected $710 and sent it to help starving Irish men, women and children."

i've always wondered why they did that. was there a long lost folk memory being tapped amongst the choctaw ,when they first heard of the irish famine?

curious isnt it?

Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 24/10/08 by Jbird]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 08:44 AM by netron

here's some more detail on the choctaw donation to irish famine relief..

newsok.com...

During the worst days of the Great Irish Famine of 1845-1852, when a million Irish died and another million or so fled to foreign lands like the United States, the Choctaw Indians gathered in Scullyville and raised $170 for an Irish relief fund. An account from the time recorded that "traders, missionaries, and (Indian) agency officials contributed, but the greater part of the money was supplied by the Indians themselves.”

The donation has long endeared the Irish to the Choctaw. In 1995, Irish President Mary Robinson visited the Choctaw Nation to formally offer Ireland's gratitude. In turn, members of the Choctaw Nation have visited Ireland, where they have participated in the annual "famine walk” organized by AFRI (Action from Ireland), an Irish organization that advocates for social justice around the world. Gary White Deer, an artist who lives in Ada, has been to Ireland more than a dozen times to participate in the walk and other activities.

Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 24/10/08 by Jbird]

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 08:48 AM by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by TruthTellist

I guess there is no point in mentioning that although they allied themselves with the French against the English, they Allowed Irish missionaries and traders into their society - which led to their majority converting to Roman Catholicism and assimiliating of English/Irish culture.

This greatly enhanced their ability to negotiate with Great Britain, as they could read and write the language as well as the English could and had an almost parliamentary type system of governance, which earned them respect and aided treaty ratification as their representatives spoke with the authority of their Nation and who represented them via democratic processes.

Now you're starting to mix apples and oranges as you are talking about the Iroquoin people now. It was they who had the 'almost parliamentary system of governance' with the Six Nations south of Lake Ontario. If I'm not mistaken, they didn't form up as such until after contact. Franklin apparently used some of the precepts when formulating the US.

The Iroquoin and Algonkian language groups are about as far apart as English and Chinese. Also, it was the Huron, Petun and Tobacco of the north shore who allied with the French...on the whole, the 6 Nations were allied with the English.

As to the Mi'kmaq, I do believe it's pronounced MicMaw. There are some interesting 'coincidences' around Nova Scotia that could associate Irish, certainly Basque, with pre-Columbian activities, but none of these have been completely sorted out. Meanwhile, there's a whole bunch of myth been attached to it.

Skyfloating, you wanted me to elaborate on then issue of "common roots, not a trans-atlantic diffusion. Certainly not as late as 800." The thought here is that dispersal of the people from Asia to North America can be tracked by measuring the divergeance from the proto-langage that is the common root. The difference between the Lapp language, and Ojibway, for instance...and it's come a long, long way. Certainly the Algonkian speaking people got here at or before the end of the last Ice Age. That means were talking , like, 13kya.

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 08:49 AM by netron

Originally posted by asmeone2
Skyfloating:

You come up with some interesting threads! I love this one about language.

Let me ask you this. Do you know how similar are the NA/Celtic language in terms of subject/object/verb arrangement?

In the method of verb conjugation?

In the pronoun and verb cases (that is, past, present, future, or formal/informal/vulgar)

Do the languages display a similar system of giving object gender?

(Since you did the research I'll assume you're educated enough that you don't need example, but let me know if you do.)

Coincidences of word meaning can happen, but if your research indicates a high correlation of similar words, and a similar structure of the language, then you're really on to something.

I look forward to hearing more of this!

[edit on 23-10-2008 by asmeone2]

i learned irish in primary school in ireland - i'm not fluent , but i still remember some basics.

for example, the verb always comes first in a sentence

chuaigh me = i went (or more accurately, "went i", with chuaigh being the verb)

An mbeidh cupán tae agat? - would you like a cup of tea. "you" being at the end - agat, "an mbeidh" being the "would like"

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 08:55 AM by netron

here's another interesting aspect.

the irish legend of "tir na nog" - or the land of eternal youth - was situated west of ireland , across the sea.

en.wikipedia.org...

it has striking similarities to the Japanese legend of Urashima Taro

en.wikipedia.org...

might native americans been the conduit for the exchange of such tales from opposite sides of the globe?

reply posted on 24-10-2008 @ 09:08 AM by netron

there is an interesting blogpost here about irish gaelic , with examples and explanations...

northcoastview.blogspot.com...

this might be of help to ATS folks who have knowledge of native american languages.

one other point. a friend of mine once did a yachting trip across the atlantic from the canary islands to the carribean island on Antigua. He said to me, that if you pick the right time of the year, you can make it across without experiencing a single storm... now he had GPS and all the latest yachting gizmos , but i could help wondering that surely , in the thousands of years of civilisation on this planet that NOBODY except columbus and the vikings managed to make it across.