Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Basic Questions on Egypt, Sumer, Indus, China,Peru
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
What ancient civilizationis older:Egypt, Sumer, Indus, Peru, or China?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
4 [36.36%]
4 [36.36%]
1 [9.09%]
0 [0.00%]
2 [18.18%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Basic Questions on Egypt, Sumer, Indus, China,Peru
    Posted: 27-Dec-2018 at 01:46
That's all very nice.. but remember when I said that the Nile River in Egypt would have originally been mostly barren except for a thin strip along the river? Well, it actually turns out the Nile River Delta is an exception and would have been extremely lush in wildlife and well irrigated. Basically it would have been a fairly significant, expansive "oasis" in the middle of deserts and sparse vegetation. This would have made the region a virtual fortress for the primeval people who lived there, perhaps giving rise to things like distinctive appearances and rapid technological advancement. The people who entered it and founded the key society there probably originated from up the Nile River in East Africa. It would be much more difficult for stone age people to enter the region from the east and west due to deserts. Thus its fairly consistent with the geography that the ancient Egyptians would trace their ancestry to East Africa, namely Punt, or what's probably the true Atlas Mountains.

Over time, the people in the Nile Delta may have reached a level of distinctiveness, perhaps after having mixed with some primeval natives of Eurasia that they made outward forays to, having achieved a certain level of technological advancement. And through oceanic exploration, creating societies in various places, including the place that you are mistaking for Atlantis. Obviously these places could resemble Atlantis if they were founded by Atlantis. What else would they model their society after besides their founding culture. So what you're saying (or "matching") may just be evidence that those cultures were founded by Atlantis, assuming your matches are even valid.

In conclusion, this theory would make the Atlas Mountains the source of the Nile River in the East Africa highlands, and Atlantis, the "island of Atlas", at the bottom of the Nile where there are segments of the Nile Delta that formed virtual islands. All of which together form one contiguous, unbroken Atlasian region. And when Atlantis is described as continent sized, it was actually referring to the whole of Africa because Atlantis was virtually the only gateway to Africa and thus came to represent all of it. There is an immense level of elegance and consistency to this explanation of Atlantis.

This also answers the question that was sought out from the beginning. Egypt, or Atlantis, is the oldest. (We can just blur the lines between the two.) It's obvious just by eye. Ancient Egypt looks way more developed and sophisticated than Sumeria.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 27-Dec-2018 at 02:39
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2018 at 18:55

I knew/saw/got what you meant and the things are interesting, but I disagree that it is relevant to Atlantis' location in the account.

Atlantis was in the west (of Africa/Libya/Egypt & Europe/Spain/Gades/Tyrrhenia/Greece) not the east.
"Invaded up to Tyrrhenia (Italy) or Greece and Libya or Egypt" or "from next Libya"
"Beyond the pillars of Hercules (furtherest point of world)"
"Distant point in the Atlantic ocean/sea" (Indian Ocean not called Atlantic)
"the real ocean" "[not in the inner Mediterranean sea]"
"[Gades & Atlas later eastern copies of Atlas & Gadeira in Atlantis]".
Strabo's Erythrean sea was west of Spain. Strabo's extension of Spain extended west of Spain.
West African links with Atlantis (Olokun, etc).
Etc.

No Nile or Ethiopian is mentioned in "Plato's" Account.

Considering all the details of the Account (size, direction, distance, highest mountains, large plain, etc etc) South America / West fits far better than Africa / East.

I agree that Atlantis is next to Atlas/Libya/Africa, so you are not far off. But it is not Libya/Africa it is "next" to it.
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Dec-2018 at 03:27
Well... what I mean is, the positions of the Atlas mountains and its associated Atlantic Sea, and also the old name of the south Atlantic Ocean, 'Ethiopian Ocean', were switched at some point to locations west of Africa when they were originally east of Africa. For both cases, there is reason to believe they would be more appropriately named for locations in East Africa. Namely if we switch things around and say the Atlas Mountains originally referred to the source of the Nile River, as some ancients would have believed, then the Atlas Mountains are in East Africa. And Ethiopia is better known to be located in East Africa as well.

If I had to guess a reason for the switch.. its possible the legendary events of Greek mythology originally took place somewhere removed from the Mediterranean Sea, but later were transplanted there. In order to make the stories more relatable, various locations nearby were renamed accordingly to somewhat fit the geography in the stories. The legends had to be made to fit the surrounding geography, because it was part of their religion. They built entire temples for the sake of these legends. For this it was necessary that the old legends had matching locations nearby, which they probably made up as they were exploring the Mediterranean.

The old approach to Atlantis is probably through the Red Sea. There was possibly a canal there in ancient times that led to the Nile Delta. There is apparently evidence for this, that is, an ancient canal connecting the Red Sea and the Nile. And there was perhaps once a major hill city in the Nile Delta, one that suddenly sank into the water and basically became a swamp or lagoon. Based on the accounts, it sounds as though they had tunneled a canal under the hill that the city was built on, which would obviously have ended in collapse.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 26-Dec-2018 at 04:11
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Dec-2018 at 22:23
Originally posted by Atlantean35

The Atlantic Sea originally referred to the sea off the coast of the Atlas Mountains. But the ancients had their geographies mixed up because they believed the Atlas mountains were the source of the Nile River. This much we at least know for certain, that they had their geography mixed up. The Nile River starts from East Africa, not Northwest Africa. There is also the mixup over the Ethiopian Ocean, where it is also in the wrong place.


Yes off from Africa like the account says (Atlas & Gadeira later eastern parallels to Atlantis & Gadeira, "from next Libya"). Diodorus Siculus "out in deep off Africa", "many days sailing across Atlantic".

But the Account original Greek words seem to imply that the Atlantic sea was lake Titicaca.
Atlantic pelagos/"sea". (It is said that pelagos means shallow/small/enclosed sea not deep/big/open sea/ocean.)
"At a distant point in the Atlantic".
"from its base in the Atlantic / this power came forth out of the Atlantic ocean", "outside they came from the sea of Atlas" / "outside jumped from this Atlantic small-shallow sea".
Muddy sea may match Titicaca better than Atlantic ocean.
"Atlantis was inside the Pillars, Athens was outside the Pillars". protu "before" the pillars. Pillars were the most distant/furtherest point of world. Pillars in Andean pictures flanking Atlas pillar.

Herodotus between Solon & Plato had Atlantic same place as we have.
Thoth came from land in West. Menes died in land of sunset.
Sea Peoples from "the isles and mainland of the outer circle of water".
Atlanteans were "invaders".

Atlas mountains are mirror image of Andes.
Atlantis' mountains (~ Atlas) were among highest in world according to the Account. Atlas held up earth & sky. (Also compare Antaeus?)
Greek myth of labours of Hercules also have them in far west.
Atlas pillar is motif in Andean pictures.
(Egyptians had south as "up/top". Antarctica is high.)

Originally posted by Atlantean35


It's possible that the Ethiopian Ocean, and the Atlantic Sea, are part of the same process that got the geographies mixed up. Because both of them would be more appropriate for the seas off of the east of Africa, wherein the Atlas Mountains are described as the source of the Nile, making them possibly being originally located in East Africa.


I agree it is off Africa (as account implies by "from next Libya", and Atlas, etc) but the west not east.
If there is good evidence not just possible.
The Account only mentions Atlantic and the real ocean not the Ethiopian.
The account doesn't mention any source of the Nile.
There might be some mixed up but there is a strong match that doesn't require any such major mixing up. We should always try our best to objectively look to see if there is any match with as little mixing up as possible, unless there is good evidence there is no such match and/or that there is corruption. The mixing up was not in the Account but all them & us since the account.
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Dec-2018 at 00:00
The Atlantic Sea originally referred to the sea off the coast of the Atlas Mountains. But the ancients had their geographies mixed up because they believed the Atlas mountains were the source of the Nile River. This much we at least know for certain, that they had their geography mixed up. The Nile River starts from East Africa, not Northwest Africa. There is also the mixup over the Ethiopian Ocean, where it is also in the wrong place.

It's possible that the Ethiopian Ocean, and the Atlantic Sea, are part of the same process that got the geographies mixed up. Because both of them would be more appropriate for the seas off of the east of Africa, wherein the Atlas Mountains are described as the source of the Nile, making them possibly being originally located in East Africa.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 23-Dec-2018 at 00:16
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Dec-2018 at 01:16

Originally posted by Atlantean35

The fact that New World crops did not exist in the Old World means that Atlantis is not the Americas.


I agree that this is a slight challenging point, but i do not agree that it proves Atlantis can't be in Americas because it is not itself an absolute proof/disproof, and the one thing doesn't override all the other many matches evidences, and it has possible answers to or reasons.
America tobacco/cocaine was found in Egyptian New Kingdom mummies.
South American fan palm is depicted in Assyrian pictures of Toakkari Sea Peoples.
S Compton's Exodus Lost says that Phoenicians etc may have got their blue/purple from murex from Mexico.
I think i read somewhere that bananas were carried from Old to New World?
Maize is related to corn?
(Can you supply a list of all crops?)
Heliolithic culture found all around world, it was neolithic which means agriculture. 
Quinoa/Keenwah "mother of all grain" resembles Havah/Eve mother of all life.
Atlantis Account says/implies Atlanteans were remotest and had little contacts with Old World.
Atlantis in Peru didn't need Old World crops because they had large plain with 2 crops a year. The Account says the island suppied all their own needs.
(Animals and plants crossed early to Americas after Noah's flood. Joseph's famine might also relate.)

Originally posted by Atlantean35


And there is no other continent or island in the Atlantic. Thus, its necessary that the descriptions and place names are inaccurate.


I agree that Atlantis was a continent or (large) island in the Atlantic ocean/sea (which Africa is not really), and that there ae not other (sunken/submerged) large lands in the Atlantic ocean.

But i do not agree that the statement is true.
America is in the Atlantic.
(But i assume you may mean sunken/submerged, which there are answers to.... And/or are thinking of the opposite continent, which there are also answers to....)
The Atlantic sea of the Account is not the ocean but the sea Titicaca, when reading original Greek words.
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Dec-2018 at 09:43
The fact that New World crops did not exist in the Old World means that Atlantis is not the Americas. And there is no other continent or island in the Atlantic. Thus, its necessary that the descriptions and place names are inaccurate.
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Dec-2018 at 02:45
Originally posted by Atlantean35


If they match, then so what?


If they match (and they do strongly match) then this is pretty serious evidence that can not be rightly just dismissed as just so what. Only the true site can match (only-best), others dont/cant.

Originally posted by Atlantean35


Peru is still disproven to be Atlantis.


Why? What evidence? Says who?
I do not see any disproof. And if people dont give a fair chance full hearing of all the evidences first before passing judgment then they are not being very objective or fair or genuine.

Originally posted by Atlantean35


There are a range of possible locations.


No there are not. Only the true location only-best matches all the details of the account, while other locations don't. Many locations are ruled out by the details of size, direction, distance, mountains, large plain, etc.

Originally posted by Atlantean35


Peru is not one of them.


Why? What evidence?
You have not even heared all our evidences.

Originally posted by Atlantean35


I've also offered some better candidates.


What candidates? You mentioned Africa/Egypt. I said some reasons why Atlantis certainly doesn't/can't be in Africa. (No personal offense meant, but if you dont try to be objective then it is not easy to not seem antagoistic.)

Originally posted by Atlantean35


The story's location names and descriptions are probably not completely accurate.


This is only an opinion or theory. What proof is there for such?
We found most all the details are true and match the found site. Only some things like the date and Greek name are not necessarily totatly literally "accurate" (though they are true just not totally literally/verbatim.)

Originally posted by Atlantean35


But I think some of the quirky details of the story might be worth trying to match. But mountains, plains, place names, size measurements, these are not the sort of details you want to start comparing because either they are too general or are too likely to be inaccurate.


You cant just pick and choose what details are or are not "accurate" unless you have pretty good evidence that they are not. Once you start throwing out the source text details then you have nothing to go on except what fancies/suits you have. (Not using "you" in any offensive meaning. I cant really say "we" since i am not doing the quoted.)
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2018 at 10:50
Originally posted by Arthur-Robin

Originally posted by Atlantean35

I don't know Arthur-Robin. Maybe Atlantis the city was built somewhere in the Nile River delta. This delta is known for its tendency for the ground to sink. Such a resultant marsh would resemble the in-navigable mud shoals described as all that was left of Atlantis. Maybe there was once a hill near the Nile delta region. So Atlantis the continent/island was Africa, and Atlantis the city in the Nile Delta? To build three concentric moats would take a lot of water, which the Nile River had. Also, a canal to the sea is in the description. It had to have access to the sea, sinking ground, which all points to a delta region, particularly the deltas that form at the end of a massive river like the Nile. The earthquake may have been a mud slide or the ground wasn't stable due to massive amounts of water undermining it. The current Nile Delta is shifted northward because silt gradually expands the shoreline of the delta. If we move the Nile Delta southward, projecting for its possible past locations, it is closer to some highlands that are just to the east of the Nile.


If you wish I am willing to discuss the evidences with you on where Atlantis can/can't be and is/isn't from the details of the Atlantis Account and other historical/archaological/etc evidences in a separate thread/topic (if i am able re troubles i've been having). We have found it for sure and i have no doubts or dont know or maybe about it (though there are some few details that we still have not answered, but the many matches we have leave no doubts).

When i started looking years ago i first narrowed down where it can/cant be considering the details of its size, direction, distance, etc.
After i finally found the capital city i now find it better to work out from the central city to the wider geographical details.

If you dont wish to discuss it then i will just say you need to read the acount and make a "checklist" of all the important identification details and then see where it can or cant be. People cant guess "maybe" "i dont know" if they haven't read the account and are not using its details as guide.

You can also check out Jim Allen's Atlantis in Bolivia website though his city candidate is some miles from ours.

Other than that all i can say is what matches evidences would convince you/people? (The Milos conference listed 25 details they expect a site must match, but there are some other matches details that are quality too.)

We have match for the big hill or small mountain in centre of city.
Match for size of palace/temple
Match for the size of the central island
Match for the distance from city to the sea
Match for conecntric circles
Match for the quake(s) and flood(s)
Match for the Plain and ditch and channels
Match for "in the midpoint of the island" and "on the side of the sea"
Match for the high mountains
Match for 2 crops a year
Match for bulls and type of sacrifice
Match for the distance
Match for the direction
Match for the cisterns and conduits
Match for the orichalc and other metals
Match for size of whole island
Match for Atlantic sea or ocean
and quite alot of other matches too.
The question is what detail matches of these will people accept as convicting enough quality-wise and quantity-wise?

If they match, then so what? Peru is still disproven to be Atlantis. There are a range of possible locations. Peru is not one of them. I've also offered some better candidates.

The story's location names and descriptions are probably not completely accurate. But I think some of the quirky details of the story might be worth trying to match. But mountains, plains, place names, size measurements, these are not the sort of details you want to start comparing because either they are too general or are too likely to be inaccurate.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 12-Dec-2018 at 10:58
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Dec-2018 at 01:06
Originally posted by Atlantean35

I don't know Arthur-Robin. Maybe Atlantis the city was built somewhere in the Nile River delta. This delta is known for its tendency for the ground to sink. Such a resultant marsh would resemble the in-navigable mud shoals described as all that was left of Atlantis. Maybe there was once a hill near the Nile delta region. So Atlantis the continent/island was Africa, and Atlantis the city in the Nile Delta? To build three concentric moats would take a lot of water, which the Nile River had. Also, a canal to the sea is in the description. It had to have access to the sea, sinking ground, which all points to a delta region, particularly the deltas that form at the end of a massive river like the Nile. The earthquake may have been a mud slide or the ground wasn't stable due to massive amounts of water undermining it. The current Nile Delta is shifted northward because silt gradually expands the shoreline of the delta. If we move the Nile Delta southward, projecting for its possible past locations, it is closer to some highlands that are just to the east of the Nile.


If you wish I am willing to discuss the evidences with you on where Atlantis can/can't be and is/isn't from the details of the Atlantis Account and other historical/archaological/etc evidences in a separate thread/topic (if i am able re troubles i've been having). We have found it for sure and i have no doubts or dont know or maybe about it (though there are some few details that we still have not answered, but the many matches we have leave no doubts).

When i started looking years ago i first narrowed down where it can/cant be considering the details of its size, direction, distance, etc.
After i finally found the capital city i now find it better to work out from the central city to the wider geographical details.

If you dont wish to discuss it then i will just say you need to read the acount and make a "checklist" of all the important identification details and then see where it can or cant be. People cant guess "maybe" "i dont know" if they haven't read the account and are not using its details as guide.

You can also check out Jim Allen's Atlantis in Bolivia website though his city candidate is some miles from ours.

Other than that all i can say is what matches evidences would convince you/people? (The Milos conference listed 25 details they expect a site must match, but there are some other matches details that are quality too.)

We have match for the big hill or small mountain in centre of city.
Match for size of palace/temple
Match for the size of the central island
Match for the distance from city to the sea
Match for conecntric circles
Match for the quake(s) and flood(s)
Match for the Plain and ditch and channels
Match for "in the midpoint of the island" and "on the side of the sea"
Match for the high mountains
Match for 2 crops a year
Match for bulls and type of sacrifice
Match for the distance
Match for the direction
Match for the cisterns and conduits
Match for the orichalc and other metals
Match for size of whole island
Match for Atlantic sea or ocean
and quite alot of other matches too.
The question is what detail matches of these will people accept as convicting enough quality-wise and quantity-wise?

NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Dec-2018 at 09:25
I don't know Arthur-Robin. Maybe Atlantis the city was built somewhere in the Nile River delta. This delta is known for its tendency for the ground to sink. Such a resultant marsh would resemble the in-navigable mud shoals described as all that was left of Atlantis. Maybe there was once a hill near the Nile delta region. So Atlantis the continent/island was Africa, and Atlantis the city in the Nile Delta? To build three concentric moats would take a lot of water, which the Nile River had. Also, a canal to the sea is in the description. It had to have access to the sea, sinking ground, which all points to a delta region, particularly the deltas that form at the end of a massive river like the Nile. The earthquake may have been a mud slide or the ground wasn't stable due to massive amounts of water undermining it. The current Nile Delta is shifted northward because silt gradually expands the shoreline of the delta. If we move the Nile Delta southward, projecting for its possible past locations, it is closer to some highlands that are just to the east of the Nile.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 11-Dec-2018 at 09:31
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2018 at 23:51

Originally posted by Atlantean35

Peru is literally too far away to invade Greece. Thus the Atlantis, in Plato's context, can't be talking about the Americas.


1. This is only a incredulous disbelief not definite fact. People can not dismiss stark matches between Atlantis city & plain etc and Tiahuanaco city & "Altiplano" etc.

2. Atlantis Account and other sources say/imply Atlantis was remote with little/no contact with other humans; called "invaders"; at the pillars of Hercules (the furthest distant point); "at a distant point in the Atlantic"; etc. The sea peoples were also said to have come from the ocean.

3. Invasion could have happened in stages with colonies/outposts in places like Heligoland & Tartessos/Huelva. The account may imply this by saying the invaed upto Tyrrhenia and Libya/Egypt, and that they travelled through Europe & Asia & Libya/Africa.
There are evidences of intermediate stages, eg statue of man on horse in Azores pointing west with word cates which is "this way" in Quechua (Inca).
Heliolithic culture is found in various places all over the world including Peru.

Originally posted by Atlantean35


Also, basically all of the new world crops can't be found in the old world. This pretty much damns any notion of major contact between the old world and new world. 


This is not necessarily valid for various reasons.
Bananas.
Mutation/evolution.
Used ones which fitted the environment/climate.
Quinoa/Qeenwah "mother of all grains" recalls Eve/Hawah "other of all life".
Some New World plants/grains are related to Old World grains (maize & corn?)

Originally posted by Atlantean35


Peru can be a colony of Atlantis though, in fact, I believe that to be the case.


Peru is not just a colony, there are stark matches for the Atlantis capital city, and plain, and mountains, etc etc which do not match any otherlocation candidate we checked. There are not many places in world that atch the right distance, direction, high(est) mountains, inland sea, large plain, etc. Look in your atlas for such a large plain and high mountains. Andes is also one of the only major sites for brass/brone / tin/zinc, and gold.
Peruvian masks etc have the Atlantis pillar rising from concentric circles city which is as good as "Atlantis" name written in words.
How come Peru is not "too far" for a colony but is "too far" for an invasion over time?

Originally posted by Atlantean35


I'm saying this again, but Atlantis was probably Africa or in Africa. Africa was essentially an island because of the Sahara desert. Any sort of contact between Eurasia and Africa in ancient times, were more likely to occur by ship, whether its floating along the Nile River or crossing the western and eastern seas.


Atlantis was a large island land mass, a separate land mass to Old World, with high mountains, large plain, in a certain direction, a certain distance (distant/remote/no-contact). Atlantis can't be closer than Atlas mountains and "Pillars of Hercules" "at Gibraltar". As such it does not match Africa/Libya.
Urani/Aaru/Amenti "land of the sunset".
Egyptian world had 10 bows/arcs.
Some West Africans do seem to have had contacts with Atlantis to the west, eg Olokun, etc.



Edited by Arthur-Robin - 09-Dec-2018 at 23:57
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Dec-2018 at 06:00
Peru is literally too far away to invade Greece. Thus the Atlantis, in Plato's context, can't be talking about the Americas. Also, basically all of the new world crops can't be found in the old world. This pretty much damns any notion of major contact between the old world and new world.  Peru can be a colony of Atlantis though, in fact, I believe that to be the case. I'm saying this again, but Atlantis was probably Africa or in Africa. Africa was essentially an island because of the Sahara desert. Any sort of contact between Eurasia and Africa in ancient times, were more likely to occur by ship, whether its floating along the Nile River or crossing the western and eastern seas.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 09-Dec-2018 at 06:33
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2018 at 21:40

Let me and you try to just stick to mere details rather than mere words.
The 1 or 3 or 4 cities of Asshur in Genesis 10 are claimed by you/them to match Assyria (and not Peru/Atlantis), and claimed by us to possibly match Peru/Atlantis (better than Assyria). So let us revise the city/cities matches with the 2 locations and see whether one or other is better or both are equally indefinite until further evidences.

Before we discuss the details matches we need to say that different translations of the Genesis 10 verse differ on whether the person is Nimrod or Asshur, and whether the land is Asshur or unnamed, and whether it is 1 great city with 4 components or 3 or 4 cities (and the great city being all 3/4 components or just the one Resen city).

"From/Out-of that land [Shinar] (he [Nimrod]) went (forth) (into) Asshur/Assyria...

or

"From/Out-of that land [Shinar] (he [Nimrod]) went (forth) being made strong, or when he had been made strong...

or

"From/Out-of that land [Shinar] went (forth) Asshur/Assyria ["the strong/gracious one"]...

... and (set himself to) building/built Nineveh, (and) Rehoboth (- ((of/by/on) the) Ir/river/city [Euphrates]), (and) Calah, and Resen (which is) between Nineveh and Calah ;/: ((all) these the/a great city)."

or

... and (set himself to) building/built Nineveh, (and) Rehoboth (- ((of/by/on) the) Ir/river/city [Euphrates]), (and) Calah, and Resen (which is) between Nineveh and Calah ;/: this/that/the (same) [Resen] (is) the/a great city."

0. 1/3/4 cities/components of Asshur:

Bible: 1 great city of Asshur ("a step/steps" / "black" / "strong" / "to go in  a straight line" / "the gracious one" / "heaven prince/host") with 3 or 4 components, or 3 or 4 cities of Asshur with one of them (Resen) a "great city".

Assyria: For 3 or 4 cities they have 2 cities possible names matches (Nineveh & Calah) but not the other two (Resen, Rehoboth), though 1 of the latter 2 (Rehoboth) "might be district/streets of Nineveh", and the other 1 (Resen) is proposed to possibly be Selamiyah. For 1 great city they have a city Ashur/Assur or Gasur, though it might not match "great city" with 3/4 components at an early date? (Ashur was also late?)

Atlantis (Peru): 1 great city with 3/4 components could match Atlantis city. (Atlantis had a few main buildings and rings.) The bible surely must have mentioned Atlantis city somewhere, and the great city of Asshur is similarily as early as Atlantis was. "None of Nimrod's cities in Shinar is called great like Resen".

Peru (Atlantis): 1 great city with 3/4 components could match Tiahuanaco (& Akakor?) (The main parts of Tiahuanaco are the Akapana, Kalasasaya/gateway, (Kantatayita,) PumaPunku,
(Lukurmata).)  3 or 4 cities could match 3 or 4 of the 5 cities in the route of Viracocha (some equidistant from preceding and succeeding sites), and the 3 windows (in a line) of Peruvian traditions.
(Stede Citades in Americas?)

1. City/component Nineveh:

Bible: Nineveh "house/abode/dwelling of Ninus/fish/Nina/son" or "agreeable/handsome" or "lady/goddess Eve" (one of 3/4 cities or 3/4 components of great city, on opposite side of Resen from Calah).

Assyria: There is a Nineveh (Koyunuk/Mosul) which does have prehistoric strata/levels, though such a prehistoric city might not match the city in Genesis 10?

Atlantis (Peru): the big/small hill/mountain (which is the dwelling/temple/grove of Clito (& Poseidon))? or else the temple or palace?

Peru (Atlantis): could match either the Pumapunku (puma matches Nimrod) or the Akapana (had water fed into various parts of it) at Tiahuanaco.
Or else Tiwanaku or Pucara or Cuzco (south), or Macchu-Picchu/Intihuatana or Olantaytampo or Cuzco (north), & Sutic-tocco or Tampu-tocco (right/left window)?

2. City/component Calah:

Bible: Calah "vigour, firm rugged strength, full/old age" (one of 3/4 cities or 3/4 components of great city, on opposite side of Resen from Nineveh).

Assyria: could match Kalah (Nimrud) or Kalah-Shergat, but how much details matches do they have apart from the names?

Atlantis (Peru): palace/temple/citadel/acropolis of Poseidon/Atlantis?

Peru (Atlantis): Could match Kalasasaya or Pumapunku at Tiahuanaco.
Or else Macchu-Picchu or Olantaytampo or Cuzco (north), or Tiwanaku/Kalasasaya or Pucara or Cuzco (south), & Tampu-tocco or Sutic-tocco (left/right window)?

3. City/component Resen:

Bible: Resen/Dasen "halter/bridle/jaw (of crocodile)", "great city" of 3/4 cities, or one of 3/4 components of great city, between Nineveh & Calah.

Assyria: No find of Resen between Nineveh & Calah, though Selamiyah or Larissa or Yassin tepe or Karameles has been proposed.

Atlantis (Peru): ring(s) of Atlantis? ditch "comes to city from either/both/two sides?

Peru (Atlantis): "canal" around central Tiwanaku (like 2 pincers, between Kalasasaya/Akapana & Pumapunku)?
Or Cuzco or Pucara or Olantayampo (between MP & Tiwanaku), & Maras-tocco (middle window).

4. City/component Rehoboth:

Bible: Rehoboth(-Ir) "(the) wide-squares/ public-square / wideplaces/broadplaces / roominess/openland / streets/avenues (of the city/town/river)" (one of 4 cities or 4 components of great city, or a non-city associate of 3 cities/components).

Assyria: No Rehoboth(-Ir) has been found in Assyria, though it is claimed could be districts/streets of Nineveh though not a separate city (unless it was a later merger). Ir "(the) (great) river" is usually Euphrates though it could also/alternatively be Tigris/Hiddekel (Dan 10:4).

Atlantis (Peru): (The "central ground" and/or rings and/or) "large Plain" with its channels and canal/ditch (and/or the country) of Atlantis city/island. 

Peru (Atlantis): (Tiwanaku &) the "Altiplano" (with its geoglyphs around Tiwanaku), & the Dessaguadero canal (south).
Meski-Ag(g)ushe-ir who went up into the mountains (Andes/Atlas) also contains the same ir "swift" word?

5. Land Asshur/unnamed:

Bible: "went forth into" land Asshur ("a step/steps" / "black" / "strong" / "to go in  a straight line" / "the gracious one" / "heaven prince/host") or unnamed land "out of that land (Shinar "two rivers")". "Asshur is unlikely to have set up so close to Nimrod's cities" (Hislop).

Assyria: they have a possible land name match, and the bible does also call Assyria the land of Nimrod, though the bible is unclear if the name is Asshur or unnamed land. Assyria is late in Mesopotamian history (after Akkadian and Ur 3, near-contemporary to Isin and Old Babylonian).
Asshur & "Tigris" of Genesis 10 are before the Flood, and it is unlikely that the Tigris would have survived the Flood if it was global (as the bible and other traditions seem to imply it was).
Unnamed land & river Ir of Genesis 10 could match Euphrates and unnamed land of Eden in Genesis 2, rather than Assyria/Tigris/Hiddekel? (Atlanteans may match 4th age in Daniel?)

Atlantis (Peru): Asshur/Arthura is maybe similar to aTRoS & Atlas & Artus/Arthur?

Peru (Atlantis): "Out of that land" & "went forth" & "into" & unnamed land could match Peru.
Peru was land of storm/bull god Ishkur/Rimac (ref Sitchin and Paracas candelabra etc).
Osiris was in Amenti/Urani in the west or underworld.
Asshur was one of the 4 world quarters lands around Eden in Genesis 2.
(The great river Euphrates in Revelation/Apocalypse might match the Atlantic?)
The route of Viracocha?

6. Person Nimrod/Asshur:

Bible: Nimrod ("subduer of the spotted one", "rebel", a gibbor and hunter) or Asshur ("a step/steps" / "black" / "strong" / "to go in  a straight line" / "the gracious one" / "prosper" / "heaven prince/host") went "out of that land (Shinar "(land of) two rivers" / "sleeps") forth into" Asshur or unnamed land. Two Asshurs one Hamite & one Shemite. (Nimrod might be Ninurta or Marduk or Nisroch or Enmerkar.)

Assyria: Assyrian is latterly related to Sumerian, and the bible does call Assyria the land of Nimrod, but can they show that a person matching Nimrod/Asshur went there then at such an early date? (Assyria is late in Mesopotamian history (after Akkadian and Ur 3, near-contemporary to Isin and Old Babylonian).) There is an Assyrian god Ashur/Assur though they have to show a historical/traditional match. Ninus of Nineveh is legend and not as verified as ours. The bible text says "out of that land" "wnt forth" "into" "Assyria or unnamed land" which may not match Assyria which was also in Mesopotamia? Calah is called Nimrud but this is late Moslem/Arab from Biblical. Unless Asshur might be Sargon?

Atlantis (Peru): "Poseidon" went to Atlantis from Old World; Meskiaggusheir "went up into the mountains" could match Atlas/Atlantis mountains

Peru (Atlantis): Meski-Ag(g)ushe-ir "went up into the mountains" could match Andes; Viracocha or Manco Capac or Naymlap came to Americas from Old World. Puma of Pumapunku can match Nimrod. Peru was land of storm/bull god Ishkur/Rimac (ref Sitchin and Paracas candelabra etc). Peruvian is almost as early as Sumerian.
Various sources give evidence of Peruvian links with Sumerian (Jim Allen, Sitchin, me), eg Anaku resembles Wanaku/Tiwanaku.
Tiahuanaco/Tiwanaku/Wanaku at the bottom of lake Titicaca is analogous to Eridu/Urdu at the top of the (Persian) Gulf (and some people like Rohl think Eridu is Babel).



Edited by Arthur-Robin - 08-Dec-2018 at 22:15
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
Arthur-Robin View Drop Down
General
General


Joined: 23-Feb-2006
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 937 		  Quote Arthur-Robin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2018 at 18:47
Originally posted by Sharrukin

evidences are "mere speculations".
No, A-R.   Evidences are "available bodies of facts".   The operative word is "facts".    You are NOT presenting facts, just speculations which YOU are trying to present as facts.  You cannot use your "interpretation" of information as "fact" when there are much more plausible solutions with the same information.    Nimrod did not have to jump a half a world away to establish colonies when there were neighboring regions to do the same.   Why would he?   That would've been impractical.   And what we know of the ancients were that they were very practical.  He would have to have conquered a very large number of tribes and states to do that when the historical record of Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, and Assyrian conquerors ONLY conquered in the Middle East.    


You twisted whatever sentence of mine you half quoted by only posting half of it. You are the one that claimed many of our evidences are mere speculations.
What is a "fact"? Orthodox shelve many out of place facts. What i always tried to do was post evidences of quality matches between the source texts details and historical/arhcaeological sites/etc. But you and others constantly refuse to admit the matches are even possible.
All that mattered to me was the matches evidences that the great city of Asshur seems to possibly match Tiahuanaco and Atlantis city.

Orthodox scholarship and "science" has many sepculations and theories not proven definite facts. Your/their own match of Asshur of Genesis 10 with Assyria is not more better than ours with Peru. Yous have no Resen between Nineveh & Calah.

Why did/would Poseidon cross to "a distant point in the ocean" as you admitted in a recent post? Why did Columbus travel across ocean? Why did Meskiaggusheir go up into the mountains?

Our matches might not be deifnite facts but they are not just speculations either. The matches & evidences do have a certain amount of quality to them.

He didnt have to, why would he, it is impractical are only theoretical disbeliefs they are not definite.

The translations are unclear whether Nimrod or "Asshur".

Some scholars have shown matches between Sumerian and Peruvian/Andean (Sitchin. Jim Allen. me). Anaku resembles Wanaku. I already posted some evidences.

Originally posted by Sharrukin
We just obviously differ on what we each see or consider to be valid evidences. Critics are always trashing most source texts despite evdiences that the texts have some stark real matches in real history.
The science, expertise, and philosophy behind the extraction, and discernment of the facts, with a healthy sense of skepticism is alive and well, thank you.   Criticism is always a good thing.   It keeps scholars honest or even helps in improving their own arguments.    As far as YOUR "stark real matches" are concerned, they are just not there!!!!


You are arguing mere words. Not valid unless we are discussing a particular source text (HB, Atlantis Account, Bible, Herodotus, etc). There are stark matches for some of these. The stark matches are there but they are evaded/ignored/silenced/coveredup or unfairly/untruly trashed. For example i have shown stark matches between Atlantis city and Tiahuanaco in a thread in this forum a year or so ago.
The opposition constantly call themselves "science" etc and call others "unscientific" etc but this is mere untrue tactics. Only the matches evidences mater not tactics or claimed credentials.
Criticism is not good if not also balanced by acknowledging the good/true/right/strong/possible matches not just always only negative.
Orhtodox "experts" admit they couldn't find Atlantis or Arthur's battle sites or Moses/Joseph in Egypt etc (except they eventually steal and claim credit themselves. They dismiss even the mention of word Atlantis. They prejudicially trash all source texts as unreliable using artrtificial "textual criticism" theories.

Originally posted by Sharrukin


The rest of your responses aren't even worth arguing.    You pick up that we haven't discovered Resen and Rehoboth-Ir in Assyria, when we haven't even discovered Akkad in Nimrod's Shinar, yet you are willing to accept that Shinar was Sumer or Babylonia.     And then...….Resen and Rehoboth-Ir could have been the most ancient names of certain cities (only a speculation) and became known by other names.    The city of Asshur itself was also known as Baltil.    The Assyrian city of Nuzi was known more anciently as Gasur.  and yet a third Assyrian city earlier named Sekhna was later known as Shubat-Enlil.  Another alternative was that these places were perhaps districts to the sites of Nineveh and Calah since their names may mean "streets of the town" "public square of the town" (Rehoboth-Ir) and since Resen was supposed to be located between Nineveh and Calah, the village of Selamiyah has been proposed as a possible site.   The point is that you don't have to look all over the world for them when they could be located near Shinar.


Resen is different to Akkad. You know where Resen should be (between Nineveh and Calah) and in a much smaller area.  Ir can mean river or city. "Broadplaces or streets of the town also altertnatively can match Atlantis plain and the "Altiplano". Surely the bible had to mention Atlantis city somewhere. Atlantis was very early like Asshur in Genesis 10.

I accept Shinar is probably Sumer because of various evidences reasons similar to why/how i opine that the city of Asshur seemingly may be in Peru not Assyria. The district(s) theory doesnt seem vey quality to me. Bible has either 1 or 3 or 4 cities of Asshur.

"Dont have to" depends on the evidences for the different locations. If the evidences for some other location like Peru are convicting enough then we do have to admit it is possible, if the evidences for Assyria is not strong enough we cant admit it is necessarily convicting enough.

The difference between me and you/them is that i admit Assyria is possible though i think/feel Peru is more possible, where as you/they refuse to admit Peru is at all possible despite our seeming matches evidences and only assert Assyria is possible despite lack of Resen etc.

All these replies above in this post are mere words sorry to defend myself from untrue/unfair said words. I have already posted specific pros for Peru and cons for Assyria in previous posts/threads. I would just be repeating unless find more new evidences. If you are willing i am willing to discuss Atlantis city matches with Tiahuanaco in another thread.
NZ's mandatory fluoridation is not fair because it only forces it on the disadvantaged/some and not on the advantaged/everyone.
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084 		  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Dec-2018 at 04:21
Sorry people your posts just say you can not connect that idea of God&State&Civilisation have spread around the world from primal times.Names you used today were frequently used sentences than.How do we can create sustainable human society that is mature enough to change itself with change of surroundings and tolls of manufacturing??That's Aristotle ,that"s Plato...Volter...Dialectics...That"s everything...Smile
Na"De"Na"J=From Worshiping =Praising God-Compensation=Refund=Tax-Bank=Money=Cash=Coin originated-positioned-suited... Population=People-Mortality=Lethality-Action=Activity=Business=Trade=Culture(Ja)
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Dec-2018 at 12:51
I have to add something that i think is important. There is a certain dynamic in Greek mythologies that i have been trying to contextualize with certain facts and realities. There were a recent set of gods who had overthrown an earlier set of gods called the Titans. The Titans were likely a race of giants. They were also probably associated with the mythical Cyclops race. It's thought that the Cyclops were merely smiths who wore eyepatches designed for metalworking, not that they actually had a mono-eye, which is an unheard of feature not found anywhere in nature. This Cyclops or Titan group were perhaps responsible for many of the earliest inventions that became the basis for civilization. Who were then supplanted by another group from a different region. The Greek mythologies seem to carry a perspective where they were once in Africa, looking at Eurasia as some kind of cold underworld. This aligns with the 'ker' or 'kermet' underworld narrative. But it also seems to align with the native denisens of Eurasia, namely the 'Kurgans' who were the giants of Anatolia. Some indications point to the earliest farms and cities (ie. Gobleki Tepi), and perhaps even metalworking coming from this region Anatolia. What this means is we need to be careful about the perspectives. There is not a single broadly common perspective, but two very different ones from different continents. Some sort of dynamic mixture may have always been occuring in the Middle East. What is strange though is why a more Africanized group (ie. Mongoloid, archaic yellow Africans, commonly of the highlands) had reached the Americas first if the Anatolian Caucasians invented the earliest technologies. This may have simply been due to an innate nomadic tendency due to the irregular climate of Africa. But these were not just explorers. They had dynamic technological, even mathematical tendencies as well, as can be seen from the Mayans. Hmm.. am i just second guessing myself? Is there actually no reason for considering Anatolia the "oldest"? Well, there's the Greek Titans dynamics. But maybe the Titans were also in Africa... i guess this is possible too. But the Mayans also importantly are a slightly Eurasian looking group too so maybe they were just mixed with the Anatolian natives? But then again, even the most isolated, farflung human groups can be fairly ingeneous in inventiveness, given their circumstances.

Edited by Atlantean35 - 07-Dec-2018 at 13:13
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Nov-2018 at 22:56
Egypt was the underworld because it was a place of death and filled with cannibals. This is why there exists the tale of Osiris simultaneously imparting ancient Egypt with agriculture while forbidding cannibalism. The ancient Sumerian name for the underworld was 'kur'. The ancient name of Egypt was 'krmt' (pronounced something like 'kermet'). The pre-Osirisian Egyptians needed another option besides cannibalism, which is why agriculture was the solution to ending their cannibalistic ways. In time, they may have already become a people who preferred human meat, thus the entrance to Egypt probably had to be guarded. The reason there is a desert there in the first place is a consequence of geography. It would mostly stay a desert except for the rare flukes or exceptional occasions. Unless of course you are talking about a radically different time frame, which is the reason there is often oil underneath these deserts, but that would have no relevance in this discussion. There seem to have been 7 gates into the underworld in Sumerian myths. This could be a reference to the cataracts of the Nile river, which made naturally defensible fortifications that faced in the direction of Egypt.

Edited by Atlantean35 - 17-Nov-2018 at 23:05
Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1314 		  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Nov-2018 at 14:17
I can understand why someone might think Atlantis is across the Atlantic Ocean in the Americas. But ancient geographies were probably messed up. The people in question probably migrated from the Indian Ocean theater to the Mediterranean then forgot that they did this and got their geographies mixed up in the process. Thus, Atlantis was just in Africa. Specifically East Africa. We should think about the ancient Greek myths and legends as being told from the perspective of when the ancestors of the Greeks were still in Africa. The stories got changed to fit the Mediterranean in order to make them more relatable.

No, the earliest reference to "Atlantis" (in Plato) describes the Atlanteans attacking Athens "from a distant point in the Atlantic Ocean".   The land was described a an "island" and a "continent".

Furthermore, in regards to Egypt. To the cavemen hunter-gatherers who were just emerging into a civilizational state, the part of the Nile River that cuts through the Sahara, namely the place we call Egypt, it may have represented a place of death. Basically a place you don't want to travel to, and want to stay away from. It had river surrounded by desert, with a thin strip of flood soil that grows plants, but is otherwise barren before the invention of irrigation. Before farming and irrigation, there really wouldn't have been much to eat in this region, despite there being plenty of water. Thus making the region, relatively sparse in terms of food in hunter-gather times. Yet this is the only transit point for traveling between Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. All this comes together to explain why there are strong indications that Egypt was initially home to people who were cannibals. How we know is there was a certain figure (or "god") named Osiris who is credited with imparting the people of Egypt with farming and instructing them to cease their cannibalistic practices. This is where the River Styx fits the description of the Egyptian part of the Nile River, being that it also represents the passage of death that leads into the underworld. With Cerberus being an ancient cannibalistic culture that fed on the people who tried to cross the area.  Wild canines in ancient times were often known to dig up and feed on human flesh. This is how Cerberus is connected to a primeval cannibal culture in pre-Osirisian Egypt.

This has already been covered.   The land was lush and the Nile was NOT considered a pathway of death.
Back to Top
Atlantean35 View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 22-Oct-2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 40 		  Quote Atlantean35 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Nov-2018 at 15:30
Furthermore, in regards to Egypt. To the cavemen hunter-gatherers who were just emerging into a civilizational state, the part of the Nile River that cuts through the Sahara, namely the place we call Egypt, it may have represented a place of death. Basically a place you don't want to travel to, and want to stay away from. It had river surrounded by desert, with a thin strip of flood soil that grows plants, but is otherwise barren before the invention of irrigation. Before farming and irrigation, there really wouldn't have been much to eat in this region, despite there being plenty of water. Thus making the region, relatively sparse in terms of food in hunter-gather times. Yet this is the only transit point for traveling between Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. All this comes together to explain why there are strong indications that Egypt was initially home to people who were cannibals. How we know is there was a certain figure (or "god") named Osiris who is credited with imparting the people of Egypt with farming and instructing them to cease their cannibalistic practices. This is where the River Styx fits the description of the Egyptian part of the Nile River, being that it also represents the passage of death that leads into the underworld. With Cerberus being an ancient cannibalistic culture that fed on the people who tried to cross the area.  Wild canines in ancient times were often known to dig up and feed on human flesh. This is how Cerberus is connected to a primeval cannibal culture in pre-Osirisian Egypt.

Now, I have to say I'm just guessing that Cerberus and the River Styx are referring to primeval Egypt. But what is fairly certain is, there was a cannibal culture in ancient Egypt before the founding of Egyptian civilization. Egypt would have represented a place of fear and death to the ancient peoples neighboring it, in the time before it was a prosperous farming region. It was Hades in essence, if it wasn't the actual Hades to people in the time of the dawn of civilizations. This is another reason Egypt was more difficult than the Plains of Shinar. An ancient primeval cannibal culture. It naturally follows that Sumerian civilization predates Egyptian because it was much easier for the "Atlanteans" aka East African seafarers to establish it first, with some deliberate attempts to avoid going to Egypt.


Edited by Atlantean35 - 13-Nov-2018 at 15:31
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.