Did Jews or other Semites jump-start ancient Greek civilization?

Originally posted by johncarter

Originally posted by muzzleflash
They don't seem to understand or are downplaying the links between the Greeks and their origins in ancient Egypt which seem very plausible.

For example this quote :

Greeks have been living in Egypt since ancient times, in fact Herodotus visited Egypt in the 4th century BC and claimed that the Greeks were one of the first foreigners that ever lived in Egypt.[2] Diodorus Siculus attested that Rhodian Actis, one of the Heliadae built the city of Heliopolis before the cataclysm; likewise the Athenians built Sais. While all Greek cities were destroyed during the cataclysm, the Egyptian cities including Heliopolis and Sais survived.[3]

Heliopolis and Sais were cities in Egypt though.


It is highly likely that the Greeks were in fact a later resurgence of Egyptian-Canaanite-Hebrew. Their language stems directly from it, in a line of procession. It seems to all add up fairly nicely as we piece the puzzle together.

There is no absolute proof of that and I know a good amount of professors in the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, that would wildly contest that idea/assumption.

edit on 11-7-2013 by johncarter because: (no reason given)

They build with very similar architectural methods, their religions are parallels of each other, their languages are in a line of progression of evolution, etc.

There are so many connections I don't see how it couldn't be true.

Just because no one comes out and says it doesn't mean it isn't possible. Or at least partially true in various context while possibly not in other context. There was a lot of trade and intermixing as well.

reply to post by johncarter


Oh I found it.

The Phoenicians did found Greece according to Greek Mythology.

Evidence:

Ancient Thebes

The mythology of Cadmus

Cadmus was credited by the ancient Greeks (Herodotus[3] is an example) with introducing the original Alphabet or Phoenician alphabet -- phoinikeia grammata, "Phoenician letters"—to the Greeks, who adapted it to form their Greek alphabet. Herodotus estimates that Cadmus lived sixteen hundred years before his time, or around 2000 BC.[4] Herodotus had seen and described the Cadmean writing in the temple of Apollo at Thebes engraved on certain tripods. He estimated those tripods to date back to the time of Laius the great-grandson of Cadmus.[5] On one of the tripods there was this inscription in Cadmean writing, which, as he attested, resembled Ionian letters:

Originally posted by Phoenix267

 

What about economics and politics. Like capitalism, communism, socialism, and anarchism. Many Jews like Karl Marx, Ayn Rand, etc have inspired people, movements, revolutions, etc. Look at nations like the Soviet Union.

And Einstein, Freud, Oppenheimer (nuclear bomb), and the many in education, medicine, banking, legal profession. Life would not be quite the same without the jewish influence. That is how significant I see it to be, even here in the US.

reply to post by muzzleflash


I do believe DNA population studies have been done on Greece and I don't think them having an origin in Egypt or closely related to Egypt was the result.

Originally posted by muzzleflash


Just because no one comes out and says it doesn't mean it isn't possible.

Just because someone sais it is possible, and so without presenting a sufficient amount of evidence for such a claim, to claim the former is a bit reckless.


Sure the chance is there all right, but its not high enough to warrant such assumptions. The great swaths of time in terms of thousands of years, from them to us, has not been one filled with clear saved archives containing precise historical and sociological data of trades, wars, migrations, and other movements. Much of what we believe to know today is still guess-work by archeologists observing very old findings. with a minimal amount of information that is very crude at best.

reply to post by johncarter


After looking into Linear A and and Mycenaean Greek (Linear B), I could agree that the original alphabet may indeed have come from this island (Crete). And the myth about a Phoenician heritage only being a percent of the whole story.

However what I want to know is what connections did the Minoans have with Egypt and Canaan?
Here is what I found:

The influence of the Minoan civilization outside Crete has been seen in the evidence of valuable Minoan handicraft items on the Greek mainland. It is likely that the ruling house of Mycene was connected to the Minoan trade network. After around 1700 BCE, the material culture on the Greek mainland achieved a new level due to Minoan influence.[16] Connections between Egypt and Crete are prominent. Minoan ceramics are found in Egyptian cities and the Minoans imported several items from Egypt, especially papyrus, as well as architectural and artistic ideas. The Egyptian hieroglyphs served as a model for the Minoan pictographic writing, from which the famous Linear A and Linear B writing systems later developed.[14] Bengtson has also demonstrated Minoan influence among Canaanite artifacts.

It says here that the Minoans actually created their Linear scripts as a result of Egypt's hieroglyphs. That's interesting.
Minoan Civ Wiki

Originally posted by muzzleflash

 

'Egypt' is Greek for = Kemet
'Greek' is Latin for = Hellenic
'Phoenician' is Greek for = Canaan

Thank you for your input. I will need some time to go through it but it seems very useful.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by johncarter

 

Oh I found it.

The Phoenicians did found Greece according to Greek Mythology.

Evidence:

Ancient Thebes

The mythology of Cadmus

Cadmus was credited by the ancient Greeks (Herodotus[3] is an example) with introducing the original Alphabet or Phoenician alphabet -- phoinikeia grammata, "Phoenician letters"—to the Greeks, who adapted it to form their Greek alphabet. Herodotus estimates that Cadmus lived sixteen hundred years before his time, or around 2000 BC.[4] Herodotus had seen and described the Cadmean writing in the temple of Apollo at Thebes engraved on certain tripods. He estimated those tripods to date back to the time of Laius the great-grandson of Cadmus.[5] On one of the tripods there was this inscription in Cadmean writing, which, as he attested, resembled Ionian letters:

LOL You are too funny. If you ever presented something like that in a University, they would kick your ass out instantly. But this is ATS, and the kids here need to have some fun, so go ahead.

Living with guesswork and wild assumptions based on grossly derivated Wiki information is not good science.

Remember your Plutarch: "If you live with a lame man, you start to limp."

Think about it.

Originally posted by johncarter


LOL You are too funny. If you ever presented something like that in a University, they would kick your ass out instantly. But this is ATS, and the kids here need to have some fun, so go ahead.

Living with guesswork and wild assumptions based on grossly derivated Wiki information is not good science.

Remember your Plutarch: "If you live with a lame man, you start to limp."

Think about it.

edit on 11-7-2013 by johncarter because: (no reason given)

Right because ridicule and trash talking are so academic?

Having a mythological legend is better than, what's that again? Nothing?
Right.

All historical records including mythologies are equally viable as routes to investigate ancient history. This is logical. Take everything with a grain of salt.

The mere fact some folks will refuse to even look at it? Proves to me just how ignorant and deluded this world has really become.

Originally posted by johncarter



LOL You are too funny. If you ever presented something like that in a University, they would kick your ass out instantly.

Also that isn't true.

I have seen all sorts of absurd presentations when I was attending.

As long as they follow protocol and fulfill their assignment requirements, they can pretty much say anything they want even some very highly absurd suggestions.

They won't kick people out for that. Hell they are even pretty forgiving with students who get in trouble with the law in most places.

Plus the fact of the matter is over 90% of people in college don't even care about anything academic in nature. They just want a decent job etc.

Now the library, that's where true academics can be found. No one gets kicked out from there for being wrong though, instead if you are wrong they will offer you information to educate you.

Plus aren't you forgetting that the mythology source I linked is from professors from universities? There are dozens of authentic and credible sources of this information.

Why is there a carving of Cadmus in Library of Congress John Adams Building, Washington, D.C., if it's not considered legitimate information?

That doesn't mean it's true, but it does explain a lot about the situation and what we are dealing with here.
So yes Cadmus is vitally important to the discussion of the origins of so called "Greek Civilization".

reply to post by muzzleflash


Chill out man. Let me rephrase what I think you missed in your perhaps "overzealous" approach to the origin of the Hellenic language and culture.

As you might very well know, mythology, derived from the greek word mythos, meaning "tale", "story", is a poor substitute for the study of the ancient and recent human past through material remains.

Archeology as such is a subfield of anthropology, the study of all human culture. Archaeology is the only field of study that covers all times periods and all geographic regions inhabited by humans.

To my knowledge archaeologists, like other scientists, differ greatly in what phenomena they study and how they go about their work. Although there is no fixed set of steps that all scientists follow, scientific investigations usually involve the collection of relevant evidence, the use of logical reasoning, and the application of imagination in devising hypotheses and explanations to make sense of the collected evidence.

It is here we have the problem with myth and misrepresentation, raised by the sometimes many tall tales created through the use of Mythology without the support of indisputable facts and the logical reasoning based on the presence of the former.

It seems to me like we are having a lively debate in a typical Hellenic manner (laughs). After all, remember what the ancient deemed the private man. One who dared not go to the Agora and argue with others in public was conisdered a private. The greecs called such a man "idiotos" eg. idiot from where we got our word "private".

So, we are arguing here about a very complex part of history. The origin of a language in a civilization that in a way became the foundation of our own modern society.

It is not an easy one to solve and demands a certain amount of lively debate and presentation of good facts, don´t you agree?

Originally posted by MagnusMaximus
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

I do believe DNA population studies have been done on Greece and I don't think them having an origin in Egypt or closely related to Egypt was the result.

I think we will need to separate "Greek Civilization / Culture" from "Greek genealogical heritages".

While it is most likely true that "Greek Civilization" came from and was directly inspired by Egyptian-Phoenician Civilization/Culture, and other cultures to an extent, for instance probably the Hittites or other similar period civs.

At the same time we have major problems with genealogical studies.

Sometimes incest did occur, but "Greek" or "Persian" or "Egyptian", these were clearly not a singular race exactly. They were "Civilizations" which consisted of periods of "Empire" and "Dissolution / City-states". They had boats, they traveled on horseback.

Marriage was economic and political, people inter-married across borders for various reasons. It was common in many periods, although limited in others.

"Empires" consist of multiple ethnic groups, states, languages, or other types of diverse organizational themes.

Perhaps we could say that a large percentage % of the Greek population for a large period of time consisted mainly of whatever Anatolian families, and this might be marginally true. But we also have a part of the population who are travelers, immigrants, inter-married newcomers to the community, etc.

That's why I mentioned the Lapis Lazuli trade earlier, during the bronze age it was shown they had established a trade route from the mines in modern day Afghanistan all the way to the dig site at what we call "Troy". This proves that extensive travel and intermingling occurred.

Most all of us are mixes of various gene stocks, especially this late in the game. And we all had to have come from the original same gene stock as we are all the same species technically.

And it is a fact that a vast majority of our "dating" schemes are rather imprecise. Everything ends up being "best guesstimates" when it comes to dating something in ancient times.

So to me there is no specific date only an estimation. All evidences can be interpreted in multiple ways, the trick is finding the interpretation that fits into the greater puzzle of life's questions.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

 

So yes Cadmus is vitally important to the discussion of the origins of so called "Greek Civilization".

With the obvious similarity between Phoenician and ancient Greek alphabets it is clear that the latter was based on former. Phoenician is aka Canaanite aka Jewish. So, do we have evidence that the Jews 'jump-started' also the Greek culture of reason, mythology and philosophy at large? Is the myth of Cadmus an indication that this is so?
faculty.maxwell.syr.edu...

Originally posted by johncarter

As you might very well know, mythology, derived from the greek word mythos, meaning "tale", "story", is a poor substitute for the study of the ancient and recent human past through material remains.

Why would anyone substitute them?

They are suppose to go together. Both need to be examined, the mythology we have left over, and the types of evidences we have from the field, plus anything else related. Coins, statuary, everything is important.

All of them merge too, for example on the dig we will find coins with mythological figures and symbols on them which allow us to trace and connect their minters with other minters creations at other sites. This is very important.

If you do not know your mythology you cannot possibly have a clue how to interpret these things with any consistency.

FALSE and misleading THREAD TITLE: In fact, the entire premise of the thread is false!

Jesus was a 'Judean', not a Jew.

During His lifetime, no persons were described as "Jews" anywhere. That fact is supported by theology, history and science. When Jesus was in Judea, it was not the "homeland" of the ancestors of those who today style themselves "Jews". Their ancestors never set a foot in Judea. They existed at that time in Asia, their "homeland", and were known as Khazars. In none of the manuscripts of the original Old or New Testament was Jesus described or referred to as a "Jew". The term originated in the late eighteenth century as an abbreviation of the term Judean and refers to a resident of Judea without regard to race or religion, just as the term "Texan" signifies a person living in Texas.

In spite of the powerful propaganda effort of the so-called "Jews", they have been unable to prove in recorded history that there is one record, prior to that period, of a race religion or nationality, referred to as "Jew". The religious sect in Judea, in the time of Jesus, to which self-styled "Jews" today refer to as "Jews", were known as "Pharisees". "Judaism" today and "Pharisaism" in the time of Jesus are the same.

Jesus abhorred and denounced "Pharisaism"; hence the words, "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers".

These same words apply today - in spades.

For further reading: Please enlighten yourselves as to the origin and first usage of the word Jew. Thank you.

Who was the First Jew?
John Standring
www.biblebelievers.org.au...
Subscribe to Newsletter

We know that Saul was the first king of Israel and that John was the first man called Baptist, but who was the first Jew? Neither Adam, Seth or Noah are called Jew. Nor were Abraham, Isaac or Jacob. Moses was not called a Jew and neither were Saul, David or Solomon called Jew. In fact you will not find the word Jew in the first eleven books of the Bible. The first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible, is in II Kings 16:6 (and then only in translations revised in the eighteenth century) where we find Israel was at war with the Jews and drave the Jews from Elath. Isn't it interesting that we can read over five hundred pages of the Bible before we find a Jew anywhere, yet those who call themselves Jew today claim the first five books of the bible and call it their Torah. Do you not find it rather strange that those who claim to have written the first five books of the Bible and call themselves Jew, can't find the word Jew written anywhere in the book they call their own bible, and claim to have written? Jesus Christ tells John in Revelation 2:9 "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not, but are the SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN". We know that God changed the name of Abram to Abraham in Genesis 17:5, and that He changed the name of Jacob to Israel in Genesis 32:28, but nowhere in the Bible do we find where God changed the name of Israel to Jew! There is therefore no authority by which those who say they are Jews can claim to be Israel!

By the time of Jesus the word Edom or Edomite had been translated by Greek and Latin into Ioudaios and Iudaeus meaning a Judean or person living in Judea. The original King James version of the Bible, 1611, translated Idumaean-Judean into Iewes. It wasn't until the revised editions of the King James Bible, that the word Jew appeared. The word Jew does not mean Israel or Israelite! We must conclude therefore that the first "Jews" were Canaanite-Edomite-Hittite. It is certain, according to the Bible, that Jews are not Israel.

jesusjew.htm

reply to post by ThinkingHuman


You wrote; "The Jews 'jump-started' also the Greek culture of reason, mythology and philosophy at large"

That is a wiiiiiild stretch if any.

You are forgetting the influence of northern ethnic groups, and not to forget, the eastern Hittite tribes, who were not judean, or hebrew , and the forerunners of the Iron Age. Man, you have so many faults in your seemingly desperate attempt to make your wild theory stick I don´t know where to begin. But this is ATS, throw 100 claims of mud on a wall and one might stick and certainly become declared true

Not everything you read in the "allmighty" , higly derivated and extrapolated articles of wikipedia is good

I highly recommend the book; A history of Greece to 322 B.C. by Nicholas Geoffrey Lemprière Hammond

you find it here

Originally posted by ThinkingHuman

Originally posted by muzzleflash

 

So yes Cadmus is vitally important to the discussion of the origins of so called "Greek Civilization".

With the obvious similarity between Phoenician and ancient Greek alphabets it is clear that the latter was based on former. Phoenician is aka Canaanite aka Jewish. So, do we have evidence that the Jews 'jump-started' also the Greek culture of reason, mythology and philosophy at large? Is the myth of Cadmus an indication that this is so?
faculty.maxwell.syr.edu...

I am not sure.
Cadmus predates the Exodus by probably a thousand years or so.

So we will need to connect Abram with Cadmus first if we want to connect it with Judaism directly I am thinking. Abraham lived somewhat closely around the time Cadmus is claimed to have lived. And he traveled nearby regions if I am not mistaken. So I don't know.

However, the mythological basis for Judaism is the same basis that all other religions are, astro-theological concepts of spirituality derived from Mesopotamia.

Originally posted by AmerigoVespucci
For further reading: Please enlighten yourselves as to the origin and first usage of the word Jew. Thank you.

Who was the First Jew?
John Standring
www.biblebelievers.org.au...
Subscribe to Newsletter

We know that Saul was the first king of Israel and that John was the first man called Baptist, but who was the first Jew? Neither Adam, Seth or Noah are called Jew. Nor were Abraham, Isaac or Jacob. Moses was not called a Jew and neither were Saul, David or Solomon called Jew. In fact you will not find the word Jew in the first eleven books of the Bible. The first time Jews are mentioned in the Bible, is in II Kings 16:6 (and then only in translations revised in the eighteenth century) where we find Israel was at war with the Jews and drave the Jews from Elath. Isn't it interesting that we can read over five hundred pages of the Bible before we find a Jew anywhere, yet those who call themselves Jew today claim the first five books of the bible and call it their Torah. Do you not find it rather strange that those who claim to have written the first five books of the Bible and call themselves Jew, can't find the word Jew written anywhere in the book they call their own bible, and claim to have written? Jesus Christ tells John in Revelation 2:9 "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews and are not, but are the SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN". We know that God changed the name of Abram to Abraham in Genesis 17:5, and that He changed the name of Jacob to Israel in Genesis 32:28, but nowhere in the Bible do we find where God changed the name of Israel to Jew! There is therefore no authority by which those who say they are Jews can claim to be Israel!

By the time of Jesus the word Edom or Edomite had been translated by Greek and Latin into Ioudaios and Iudaeus meaning a Judean or person living in Judea. The original King James version of the Bible, 1611, translated Idumaean-Judean into Iewes. It wasn't until the revised editions of the King James Bible, that the word Jew appeared. The word Jew does not mean Israel or Israelite! We must conclude therefore that the first "Jews" were Canaanite-Edomite-Hittite. It is certain, according to the Bible, that Jews are not Israel.

jesusjew.htm

edit on 11-7-2013 by AmerigoVespucci because: (no reason given)

That is very interesting.

I agree this is plausible because many examples of our modern terminology are highly misleading and indeed recent newcomers to the language scene. Comparatively speaking of course.

"Jew" seems very ambiguous and problematic because so many define the word differently. It's like a wild card term that can be played as if it were any other card in the game.

Thanks for posting that controversy I like being challenged to have to look up stuff to confirm things for myself.
Gonna go look into what you are talking about for further insights into these topics.