posted
I by no means believe Rasol and Supercar to be Eurocentric nor Afrocentric, yet I do feel on this particular topic they are being a little bias...
If they African pointed Columbus to the direction of the American and taught him make this voyage to the Americas then it is possible that they have made the voyages themselves. When they made the voyages, could it be possible that some of them didn't make it back, yet decided to stay on T.I? Of course!!
Could there have been a way of migrations from the West Africans who directed the Spaniard to what they called the new land? Of course...
This is possible and needs to be re-evaluated. If the skulls were of African origins and the Stone seemed to be African then then need to be added back into the discusion and not take out.
Opinion only!!!!
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Salsassin you still need glasses, because Elephants have long tails just like the statue
Clyde Winters your Icon speaks volumes so keep DRILLING the TRUTH because you have them against the wall and all they can do now is just Imagine how to respond.
If they African pointed Columbus to the direction of the American and taught him make this voyage to the Americas then it is possible that they have made the voyages themselves. When they made the voyages, could it be possible that some of them didn't make it back, yet decided to stay on T.I?
I agree that this is possible. I never suggested otherwise.
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: I by no means believe Rasol and Supercar to be Eurocentric nor Afrocentric
Thank you.
quote: yet I do feel on this particular topic they are being a little bias...
Why? See above, and then actually quote me to the effect of bias, if you can. If you can't, then you are just attacking strawmen, and there is nothing for me to address. Such are the requirements of logical discourse. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: I by no means believe Rasol and Supercar to be Eurocentric nor Afrocentric, yet I do feel on this particular topic they are being a little bias...
If they African pointed Columbus to the direction of the American and taught him make this voyage to the Americas then it is possible that they have made the voyages themselves. When they made the voyages, could it be possible that some of them didn't make it back, yet decided to stay on T.I?
Where is your evidence that Africans pointed anyone to the Americas in the first place?
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Tlatilco is not strictly an Olmec site. As I said before there are NO skeletons of any kind in the central Olmec sites of San Lorenzo, La Venta, and Tres Zapotes. Wiercinski whom Afrocentrics love to cite never said that *African skeletons* were found in Tlatilco. You just have not read Wiercinski carefully.
The evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. Many African skeletons have been found in Mexico. Carlo Marquez (1956, pp.179-180) claimed that these skeletons indicated marked pronathousness and prominent cheek bones.
Wiercinski found African skeletons at the Olmec sites of Monte Alban and Tlatilco. Morley, Brainerd and Sharer (1989) said that Monte Alban was a colonial Olmec center (p.12). Diehl and Coe (1996) admitted that the inspiration of Olmec Horizon A, common to San Lorenzo's initial phase has been found at Tlatilco. Moreover, the pottery from this site is engraved with Olmec signs.
Rossum and Vargas has criticized the work of Wiercinski because he found that not only blacks, but whites were also present in ancient America. To support this view he (1) claims that Wiercinski was wrong because he found that Negro/Black people lived in Shang China, and 2) that he compared ancient skeletons to modern Old World people.
First, it was not surprising that Wiercinski found affinities between African/Negro and ancient Chinese populations, because everyone knows that many Negro/African/Oceanic skeletons have been found in ancient China see: Kwang-chih Chang, (1976,1977, p.76,1987, pp.64,68) The Archaeology of ancient China. These Blacks were spread throughout Kwangsi, Kwantung, Szechwan, Yunnan and Pearl River delta. Moreover skeletons from Liu-Chiang and Dawenkou were also Negro. Moreover, the Dawenkou skeletons show skull deformation and extraction of teeth customs, analogous to customs among Blacks in Polynesia and Africa.
Secondly, Vargas and Rossum argue that Wiercinski was wrong about Blacks in ancient America because a comparison of modern native American skeletal material and the ancient Olmec skeletal material indicate no admixture. The study of Vargas and Rossum are flawed. They are flawed because the skeletal reference collection they used in their comparison of Olmec skeletal remains and modern Amerindian populations because the Mexicans have been mixing with African and European populations since the 1500's. This has left many components of these Old World people within and among Mexican Amerindians.
Wiercinski on the other hand, compared his SRC to an unmixed European and African samples. This comparison avoided the use of skeletal material that is clearly mixed with Africans and Europeans, in much the same way as the Afro-American people he discussed in his essay who have acquired "white" features since mixing with whites due to the slave trade. Let’s not forget, 75% of the Mexicans have African ancestry. As a result, many of the skeletons used by Vargas in his sample would have had African ancestry this would have skewed his results.
C. Marquez, < Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas>. Mexico, 1956.
S.G. Morley, G.W. Brainerd and R.J. Sharer. .The Maya .[/] Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. C.
Vargas G., Luis Alberto, (1974) "Caracteres Craneanos Discontinuos en la Poblacion de Tlatilco, Mexico[I]" Anales de Antropologia vol. 11, pp. 307-328.
......................
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Clyde Winters: sidirom quote: ______________________________________________________________________
Tlatilco is not strictly an Olmec site. As I said before there are NO skeletons of any kind in the central Olmec sites of San Lorenzo, La Venta, and Tres Zapotes. Wiercinski whom Afrocentrics love to cite never said that *African skeletons* were found in Tlatilco. You just have not read Wiercinski carefully.
The evidence of African skeletons found at many Olmec sites, and their trading partners from the Old World found by Dr. Andrzej Wiercinski prove the cosmopolitan nature of Olmec society. Many African skeletons have been found in Mexico. Carlo Marquez (1956, pp.179-180) claimed that these skeletons indicated marked pronathousness and prominent cheek bones.
Wiercinski found African skeletons at the Olmec sites of Monte Alban and Tlatilco. Morley, Brainerd and Sharer (1989) said that Monte Alban was a colonial Olmec center (p.12). Diehl and Coe (1996) admitted that the inspiration of Olmec Horizon A, common to San Lorenzo's initial phase has been found at Tlatilco. Moreover, the pottery from this site is engraved with Olmec signs.
Rossum and Vargas has criticized the work of Wiercinski because he found that not only blacks, but whites were also present in ancient America. To support this view he (1) claims that Wiercinski was wrong because he found that Negro/Black people lived in Shang China, and 2) that he compared ancient skeletons to modern Old World people.
First, it was not surprising that Wiercinski found affinities between African/Negro and ancient Chinese populations, because everyone knows that many Negro/African/Oceanic skeletons have been found in ancient China see: Kwang-chih Chang, (1976,1977, p.76,1987, pp.64,68) The Archaeology of ancient China. These Blacks were spread throughout Kwangsi, Kwantung, Szechwan, Yunnan and Pearl River delta. Moreover skeletons from Liu-Chiang and Dawenkou were also Negro. Moreover, the Dawenkou skeletons show skull deformation and extraction of teeth customs, analogous to customs among Blacks in Polynesia and Africa.
Secondly, Vargas and Rossum argue that Wiercinski was wrong about Blacks in ancient America because a comparison of modern native American skeletal material and the ancient Olmec skeletal material indicate no admixture. The study of Vargas and Rossum are flawed. They are flawed because the skeletal reference collection they used in their comparison of Olmec skeletal remains and modern Amerindian populations because the Mexicans have been mixing with African and European populations since the 1500's. This has left many components of these Old World people within and among Mexican Amerindians.
Wiercinski on the other hand, compared his SRC to an unmixed European and African samples. This comparison avoided the use of skeletal material that is clearly mixed with Africans and Europeans, in much the same way as the Afro-American people he discussed in his essay who have acquired "white" features since mixing with whites due to the slave trade. Let’s not forget, 75% of the Mexicans have African ancestry. As a result, many of the skeletons used by Vargas in his sample would have had African ancestry this would have skewed his results.
C. Marquez, < Estudios arqueologicas y ethnograficas>. Mexico, 1956.
S.G. Morley, G.W. Brainerd and R.J. Sharer. .The Maya .[/] Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. C.
Vargas G., Luis Alberto, (1974) "Caracteres Craneanos Discontinuos en la Poblacion de Tlatilco, Mexico[I]" Anales de Antropologia vol. 11, pp. 307-328.
......................
LOL. You have been shot down so many times over. It's funny. You can be written off as wishful thinking. No anthropologist takes you seriously.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
I would appreciate it, if you 'cite' my words, rather than interpreting [more like mis-interpreting or mutilating] them.
supercar quote:
So, comparing populations separated by great/extreme geographical distance and a great deal of time depth [when compared to other designated populations], will inevitably result in inaccurate/questionable conclusions, as it leads to disregard for the aforementioned factors. Here, Mexican crania from the pre-classic and classic period are compared to very geographically distant populations, which needless to say, may well have significant time of divergences [used here, in the context of separation of populations] from a common ancestral population(s), not to mention that the specimens selected for comparison with the Mexican series, come from single regions in two continents [one in Africa, one in East Asia, and one in the European subcontinent], namely Uganda, Mongolia and Poland. ________________________________________________
This is hypocrisy you can accept the comparison of ancient and modern skeletons by Walter A. Neves1, Joseph F. Powell2, Andre Prous3, MORPHOLOGICAL AFFINITIES OF THE EARLIEST KNOWN AMERICAN Genet. Mol. Biol. vol.22 n.4 São Paulo Dec. 1999 , yet you refuse to accept the findings of Wiercinski who used the same method. He was testing the theory, were Europeans and Africans found among the Olmec. He proved Africans were among the Olmecs by comparing European and African samples.
I notice that you decided to leave the rest of that citation out, perhaps because it makes it clear what is being said in the rest of the citation, which you clearly aren’t able to address or deny, or else, you are not using the right reading tools to properly interpret what is being said. Instead you are busy knocking straw man on comparison between modern and ancient crania, which has nothing to do with the issue raised, that you are supposedly replying to. And I would have to agree with Rasol, as well as SidiRom’s response that:
quote: Again you show your ignorance. Neves compares actual skulls from multiple populations. Wiercinski attempts to use stereotyped parameters of 3 archetypal racial groups. That in itself is a huge difference in methodology.
Neves et al. don’t use nonsensical racial typology to come to their conclusions, nor do they make any claims of Paleo-Americans being Africans, despite the observed affinities between the mentioned American, South Pacific, East Asian and African specimens. Matter of fact, they conclude that the earliest Paleo-Americans come from east Asia:
"The results obtained clearly confirm the idea that the Americas were first colonized by a generalized Homo sapiens population which inhabited East Asia in the Late Pleistocene - Neves et al.
And they indeed do use crania from much broader part of globe;
“In this work the extra-continental morphological affinities of a Paleo-Indian skeleton well dated between 11,000 and 11,500 years B.P. (Lapa Vermelha IV Hominid 1, or "Luzia") is investigated, using as comparative samples Howells' (1989) world-wide modern series and Habgood's (1985) Old World Late Pleistocene fossil hominids .” - Neves et al."
...which is why it is essential that you answer Rasol's earlier questions, as it will gauge whether you actually understand what is being communicated here:
Dr. Winters I have simple questions for you.
Do you understand what the above is saying?
Do you see how the conclusion is derived?
Do you see how it differs from what you are saying?
Yes, or no?
Also...
Though forensic classifications based on Howells collection have their own shortcomings for reasons I stated earlier, which you decided to leave out of that citation, which you intentionally mutilated, Howells world-wide modern series doesn’t only include just a few series from single regions of geographical extremes from select continents; there are more material involved here to work with, and the same applies to the Late Pleistocene specimens.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
rasol quote: __________________________________________________________________quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I can accept these measurements because scholars like Diop and Keita have shown how they relate to Africans and not Europeans --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
^ Misleading, mis-representation of Dr. Keita.
Keita does not claim that Olmecs were African.
Moreover Keita has rejected the outdated racial typologies of negroid-k-zoid-and mongol-oid that you continue to cling to. ___________________________________________________________
I never said Keita claimed the Olmec were Africans, I was talking about the fact that many of the claims that the ancient Egyptians were Caucasian were false. This made it possible to examine Wiercinski's work and assign the European types he mention in his paper to the subsaharan African group where they properly belong.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
LMAO. So you take a paper proven incorrect and then try to use the evidence that another paoer was incorrect about caucasians, to try to claim caucasian claims in another country are really African as well. You are too funny.
Go ask Keita what he thinks of your 'deductive' powers so we can laugh.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
sidirom quote: ___________________________________________________________________ LMAO. So you take a paper proven incorrect and then try to use the evidence that another paoer was incorrect about caucasians, to try to claim caucasian claims in another country are really African as well. You are too funny.
Go ask Keita what he thinks of your 'deductive' powers so we can laugh. __________________________________________________________________ This is not deduction its called scientific research. You read sources , study their content and then use them as evidence when testing hypotheses.
....
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: I by no means believe Rasol and Supercar to be Eurocentric nor Afrocentric, yet I do feel on this particular topic they are being a little bias...
How so?
quote:RU2religious:
If they African pointed Columbus to the direction of the American and taught him make this voyage to the Americas then it is possible that they have made the voyages themselves. When they made the voyages, could it be possible that some of them didn't make it back, yet decided to stay on T.I? Of course!!
Could there have been a way of migrations from the West Africans who directed the Spaniard to what they called the new land? Of course...
This is possible and needs to be re-evaluated. If the skulls were of African origins and the Stone seemed to be African then then need to be added back into the discusion and not take out.
Opinion only!!!!
Again, RU2religious, when it comes to issues African, "possibility" simply isn't enough; it has to be proven to be! This is the issue at hand, how earlier/pre-Columbian "possible" African arrivals in the "New World" as "African" initiatives, not as involuntary parties to traveling with European invaders, can become "established" and undeniable. For this to happen, much more compelling and organized evidential information has to be put forth to make the case. Thus far, I haven't seen any evidence of such caliber from advocates of pre-Columbian African arrivals in the "New World". I simply say it how I see it. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Ahmad, but other peoples around the world have that same phenotype. Including some native American groups with no African Admixture. Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
SidiRom, it's one thing to debate people and another to try to humilate them. The posting of Dr. Winters personal picture and insults is uncalled for.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Neves et al. don’t use nonsensical racial typology to come to their conclusions, nor do they make any claims of Paleo-Americans being Africans, despite the observed affinities between the mentioned American, South Pacific, East Asian and African specimens. Matter of fact, they conclude that the earliest Paleo-Americans come from east Asia
In this regard, Wiercinski is similar to Howells who studied East African Paleolithic crania and made the infamous remark that they were "non african" in nature - instead being more likened to everything from Peruvian Indians to Japanese Ainu.
The problem was he compared native East Africans to Niger Congo Africans, and *not* Cushitic and Nilo Saharans such as the Masai, Oromo, Somali who they in fact physically most closely resembed.
This error is critical - because in fact, the Paleolithic precense of these morphologies demonstrate their native-African antiquity.
If you are testing a hypothesis on relation of data sets A thru F, wherein ultimately *all* sets derive from A [Africa], you must test as many of the sets as possible to derive at the most sound conclusion.
It does no good to conclude that set: E is African, and set F is not -> if you don't test sets B, C and D.
Howells and Wiercinski's conclusions are both invalid because they used a'priori' [circular] reasoning to justify faulty comparison sets, which lead right back to fallacious prior held conclusions.
This is a classic example of flawed methodology in anthropology.
For Howells is means Africans can only look like his stereotypes - and if they don't, then rather than reach the logical conclusion- his stereotypes are proven wrong; he reaches a completely illogical and warped conclusion - that Africans who don't meet his racial stereotypes are not African.
Wiercinski probably just overlooked the Pacific possibilities for Olmec ancestry - but Howells acted in malice. He evaded logical comparisons in order to reach a desired and utterly illogical conclusion.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problems of transatlantic diffusion theories
The real challenge facing oceanic hyperdiffusionists is not so much that the comparisons of data they build their theories on are necessarily weaker than those made by more orthodox "evolution in situ" scholars. It is that their theories are necessarily more complicated and leave more to explain, thus leaving more to go wrong with their explanations.
The chief problem with positing a West African origin for Olmec culture is that one would expect such kinds of trans-Atlantic travel to leave EITHER more OR fewer traces in Mesoamerica, than the ones we actually find.
Occasional one-way ocean crossings are not hard to believe in during much of prehistory. There are records in early modern times, for instance, of Inuits who survived an accidental kayak trip to West Europe; certainly W. Africans could have wound up in the New World ~1500 B.C.-~500 C.E. But those Inuits did not establish colonies in the Hebrides, and we do not seek the origins of Renaissance realism in Inuit animal carvings.
Any WA fishers or traders who landed in Mesoamerica would have been unlikely to set sail with women, plant or animal domesticates, and toolmaking specialists - the kind of cargo you need in order to transplant your culture onto an alien shore already settled by others. At their luckiest, these stranded sailors would have been adopted by an indigenous tribe, married native women and adapted to native culture. It is most unlikely they would have been elected to local chieftaincies, any more than today's refugees wind up running for president in their lands of refuge.
If they did pull this stunt off, thereby persuading Native American sculptors to render them immortal - then they must have done so by HAVING SOMETHING ON the locals, culturally. Some items of Old World culture would have had to give them an advantage over pre-Olmec Mesoamericans. Well, what items were they? Millet or cattle or bronzemaking? And if they had such items, *where were they in 1492*? Why hadn't they diffused far and wide throughout Native America, the way the Spaniards' horses did, far beyond the writ of the King of Spain?
In modern experience, seafaring cultures that are successful enough to plant colonies on previously occupied shores are usually successful enough to establish regular round-trip voyages. Any fool can set out to sea, after all; the test of seamanship is being able to get back home again, as any sailor will tell you. But the supposition of round-trip travel between Guinea and Mexico creates even more problems --
E.g., why would they have bothered? For what did they trade, that was in short supply in WA and so valuable that it would be worth the incredible hazards of trans-Atlantic travel?
E.g., why didn't they bother to pick up any of those incredibly useful Mesoamerican plant cultigens that had swept across Europe by 100 years after Columbus - as well as Africa and Asia? Or did they really, and WA'ans actually had maize and tobacco and tomatoes all along - but somehow the Euros overlooked them?
E.g., how come they didn't establish "Olmec" way-stations? Nobody in his right mind sails directly from Europe or Africa to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec - you have to go via the Greater Antilles and Florida, as the Spaniards did. And you would found colonies there, as the Spaniards did, leaving plentiful signs of them today. So where is the "WA Olmec phase" of archeology in Florida, Cuba, Hispaniola and Puerto Rico? You can't have it just in Mexico.
E.g., why didn't they transmit Old World diseases to the New World the way Europeans and Africans apparently did in 1500? Epidemics devastated Native Americans from pole to pole, post- Columbus, arguing long isolation from Old World pathogens. If WA'ans had been mucking around in Olmec Country, would not that patch of Mesoamericans at least have experienced these diseases at that time? But in that case, (a) they would have been already present in Mexico by 1500 and (b) they would not have been as lethal as history records they were at that time.
One could go on and on. The problem is not that one can't cobble together an argument that ingeniously links, say, Mandes with Olmecs - or any other hyperdiffusionist pairing - but that in order to make ANY such theory work, one is driven to add so many bells and whistles and other moving parts that it becomes increasingly cumbersome and unlikely.
Oceanic diffusion theories are the scientific equivalent of Jaguars: man, they look sexy and they're sure a lot of fun to drive, but they're constantly breaking down. Scientists prefer indigenous evolution theories (at least to go to work in) because they're more like Hondas: simple and easily maintainable. *That* kind of elegance.
So it does not require a "conspiracy" or "blindness" on the part of orthodox thinkers to turn up their noses at glamorous diffusion propositions. Diffusion seems to explain one comparison neatly, but usually at the cost of making six other explanations more complex. There is an extra burden of proof to make the complex theories work BETTER than the simpler explanation of chance convergence.
The natives had no resistance to smallpox, influenza, or plague or even to mild (to us) diseases like measles. Entire populations were virtually wiped out, with some Atlantic coast tribes losing 90 percent of their adult members. Some historians go so far as to say European diseases reduced the pre-contact population of the New World as a whole by 90 percent or more. One says the population of central Mexico was reduced from 25 million in 1519 to 3 million by 1568 and only 750,000 by the early 1600s, 3 percent of the pre-conquest total.
Granted, some of these horrifying numbers may be arrived at by exaggerating the size of the original population. One researcher says there were 18 million people living north of Mexico before Columbus, but a more conservative estimate puts it at four million and some say only 1 million. Maybe there were only 12.5 million precolumbian Mexicans, not 25 million. Even so we're talking 94 percent mortality for central Mexico, maybe 87 percent for the Americas overall, reducing the population from 80 million in 1500 to 10 million 50 years later. One can make a good case that it was European germs rather than European military prowess that conquered the New World. One can also argue that disease led to the African slave trade. The conquistadors would have been happy to enslave local labor except that it was dead.
Why were the natives so vulnerable? The best guess is that Europe had been a crossroads for war and commerce for millennia and so had encountered an extraordinary number of pestilences, while the Americas were isolated and had not. Europeans had also spent a long time around domestic animals, which were the source of many of the most virulent diseases to afflict humans in the Old World. In contrast, native Americans had few domestic animals. As a consequence Europeans had developed some resistance to disease but native Americans hadn't.
In addition to propelling the establishment of Christianity in Mexico and Latin America, viruses played a role in enlarging the African slave trade throughout the Americas. African blacks are relatively resistant to yellow fever virus, whereas Caucasians and native Americans are much more susceptible. Because so many native Americans had died from yellow fever, too few workers remained to do chores in the fields and mines. The Spaniards then imported black slaves as labor replacements (3). The net result was expansion of black slave importation to the Americas (4); ironically, the yellow fever virus initially came from Africa aboard trading and slave ships.
In addition to Spain, other European countries staked out colonies in the Americas. The French colonized Haiti and, in keeping with their observation that the Africans resisted infection by yellow fever and therefore were stronger workers, used primarily black labor for their plantations. But viruses altered human history again when black slaves revolted in the early years of the nineteenth century. To put down that uprising, Napoleon sent over 27,000 crack troops to Haiti. Before long, the vast majority of these French men came in contact with the yellow fever virus transmitted by mosquitos and died from the infection. This huge loss influenced the decision not to risk the even larger numbers of troops necessary to protect other French territories in the New World and was one of the major considerations leading Napoleon to negotiate the sale of the Louisiana Territory to the United States (5).
Yellow fever is caused by a virus and is spread by the yellowfever mosquito, Aedes aegypti (L.). The disease, which originated in Africa and spread to the New World during the slave trade in the 1500s, affects humans as well as monkeys. Typically, yellow fever is expressed within one week of infection. Mild symptoms include headaches, fever, muscular pains, and nausea. Severe symptoms include dangerously high fevers, severe headaches, muscular pains, jaundice, and vomiting (characterized by black material and fluid). Yellow fever can lead to delirium, coma, and death.
Yellow fever and the yellowfever mosquito are thought to have originated in Africa. It was brought to the New World on slave ships in the 1500s. Yellow fever ravaged Europeans in the New World. Buckley (1985) stated, "The West Indies was, quite simply, a deathtrap for whites without immunity to yellow fever." The British were repeatedly stung by the disease in the Caribbean and South America. In 1741, during an expedition to capture Peru and Mexico, British forces were reduced from 27,000 to 7,000 by the dreaded disease they called "black vomit." Coastal towns and hamlets in the United States were particularly vulnerable to the disease in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Even as late as 1878, a yellow fever epidemic struck more than 100 United States towns, killing at least 20,000 people.
Was malaria present in the Amazon before the European conquest? Available evidence and future research agenda http:// midus.wisc.edu/MIDUS%20PIs/Burt_info/Malaria_FIN_Before_the_Conquest(Article_in_press).pdf Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
FACT NO.1 PEOPLE WITH BROAD FEATURES AND DARK SKIN WERE IN SOUTH AMERICA BEFORE COLUMBUS, SOME SAY WEST AFRIKANS SOME SAY AUSTRALIANS BUT THE FACT IS FACT.
Sidirom seems DESPERATE you are trying too hard, The CANARY CURRENTS brough WEST AFRIKANS to SOUTH AMERICA, only small groups of WEST AFRIKANS came in order to share their knowledge with the Native South Americans. The statue of a Elephant is a Elephant it is NOT a possum, or the numerous other pictures you keep showing. Sidirom must be really be DESPERATE. Sidirom the statue looks like a rabbit,frog,or parrot or is it PINK Dumbo the Mastodon reincarnated because you seem to be delusional.
Your losing the debate Sidirom because the Yellow Fever is a mosquito Problem, is Sidirom claiming mosquitoes originated in Afrika? The information you supplied was a poor interpretation of the Scientific Data. When they claimed Probably came from Afrika does that mean All AFrikans are immune to Yellow Fever because I can assure you high numbers of native Afrikans die from Yellow Fever also.
Your losing the debate Sidirom because your being extremely BIASED and we all see it. Now after you finished reading Ivan Sertima get back to me because I have not even scratched the surface towards PROOF so I will suggest you read Clyde Winters and Ivan Sertima and see if you still disagree.
Australians were located too far versus West Afrikans who are located just 1-2 weeks away due to the Natural CANARY CURRENTS which leads directly from West Afrika to South America.
Locate west Afrika (Home of the Manding) on the map and follow the red line and notice where it leads, If the line leads to South America then Canary Currents leads from West Afrika to South America
Which specific Oceanic Currents leads Directly from Australia to South America?
quote:FACT NO.1 PEOPLE WITH BROAD FEATURES AND DARK SKIN WERE IN SOUTH AMERICA BEFORE COLUMBUS, SOME SAY WEST AFRIKANS SOME SAY AUSTRALIANS BUT THE FACT IS FACT.
Absolutely right Hotep. And it is also worth noting that some Eurocentrists use those tropical features to define "African" in some sort of racial sense - when it suites their purposes, but then have to abandon the notion when such features and Black peoples turn up all over the ancient world.
It's also hypocritical to try to define a tropical disease like Malaria as "African", unless you define the people who carry it - including 100's of millions of Asians and Indians who carry it as also "African."
Eurocentric rhetoric is certainly inconsistent, hypocritical and racist, and this is true notwithstanding the issue of hard evidences of West African precense in the America's in pre-Columbian times. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have this book called the Tutankhamun prophecies by Maurice Cotterell
Here is an except from Pages 31...
"Clearly, it seems likely that cultural contact across the oceans interfused some of the beliefs and customs between the two civilisations. Recent research from various sources suggests trading links existed between Egypt and Mexico.
First, ancient Egyptian tomb paintings, from the time of the fourth dynasty Pharaohs in around 2600 BC, depicts paintings of papyrus reed boats that many believed capable of carrying crews, cargoes and legends from the old world Egypt to the new world of central America. Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl believed these primitive boats could survive transoceanic passages. To prove the point he journeyed to Lake Chad, in the Afrian interior, acquiring the skills to build a boat, along the lines of those in the tomb paintin gs, which would cope with the long sea journey.
Assembling a rew of seven, he set sail from the West Afrian port of Safi, in Morocco, in a papyrus reed boat named Ra (after the Egyptian sun-god), whih was 13.7 metres (45 feet) long, 4.6 metres (15 feet) wide and 1.8 metres (6 feet) deep.
Carried by the trade winds and equatorial currents, Ra covered 3,000 miles (4,830 kilometres) in just under eight weeks. But defects in the steering gear and inferior structural techniques used to bind the reeds dogged the voyage. Ra foundered, suffering damage in a Caribbean storm, and sank. Undeterred, Heyerdahl modified the design of his craft, taking note of reed boats built by the Bolivians Peruvians on the shores of Lake Titicaca in South America. Again setting sail, in 1970 from Safi, Heyerdahl and his new crew of eight reached the West Indies after 57 days at sea. Ra II proved that primitive crossings ould have been made of the Atlanti, from North Africa to central America, using basic tehnology and materials. Heyerdahl had shown that voyages like this could have been made 3,000 years ago.
Secondly, other evidene likewise supports the notion that trading links between the two coninent of Africa and the Americas were well established during Pharaonic Egypt. In March 1992 German researhers investigating the contents of Egyptian mummies called on the expertise of forensic scientist Dr Svetla Balabanova of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Ulm.
The first mummy to be tested was nicknamed Het-Nut Tawy, 'Lady of the Two Lnads', an Egyptian mummy of the twenty-first dynasty (around 1069 BC) whose coffin was richly decorated with pictures of the sky-goddess Nut. With great surprise Balabaova discovered the presence of large quantities of nicotine and cocaine in samples of this and serveral other mummies kkept in the Egyptian Museum in Munich.
At first she believed the find to be a mistake; neither of these drugs was available to Egyptians of the twenty-first dynasty. Tobacco was unknown before the introduction from the West Indies by the followers of Columbus, after AD 1492, while the coca plant which grew only in the Americas was unknown to have travelled eastwards much before Victorian times.
In the spring of 1992 the results of the discoveries were published in the scientific magazine Naturwissenschaften (79, 358, 1992), casing uproar among historians, biologists, archaeologists and anthropologist. If Balabanova was right, then everybody else must be wrong, and therefore even her fellow scientists turned against her, branding her, as so often has happened to leadin-edge scientists throughout history, a heretic.
She had made a mistake, they all agreed. In England sceptical archaeologist Rosalie David, keeper of the Manchester Museum's own collection of mummies, insisted: 'Either the tests had been flawed or the mummies themselves fakes.'
But Balanova was a trained forensic toxicologist. She had often worked with polie on investigations and autopsies. She stood by her methodology. She had used a proven method of analysis known as the 'hair shaft' technique: when a deceased hads consumed a drug, traces are carreied to the protein of the hair shaft follicle, where they remain for ever. The test could be used not only to confirm the presence of a drug but also to rule out any possiblity of contamination of the sample. First the sample was washed in alcohol, then the alcohol was tested to make sure it was clean and free from traces of the drug. Any contamination of the sample by an outside agent must permeate from the outside in. If the alcohol were free of the drug, then any subsequent find of the drug from the same follicle must therefore originate from the inside of the hair follicle, not from outside. This can happen only through consumption of the drug during the deceased's lifetime.
As for authenticity of the mummies, the pedigree of Het-Nut Tawy was not in doubt. King Ludovic I had purchased the mummy in 1845, starting a collection at that time. Records showed he bought this and others from the English trader named Dodwell. Dr Alfred Grimm, curator of the Munich museum, confirmed that inscriptions, amulets and complex embalming methods substatiated the authenticity of the mummy, which was from a tomb used to bury priests and priestesses, followers of the god Amun at Thebes.
Meanwhile, David, at the Manchester Museum, tested some of her own mummies only to find that Balabanova's results were, inexpliably, correct. This meant one of two things: either the Egypitans grew both tobacco and coca or they imported them.
This, too, sent the establishment reeling, beause there was no evidene from botanists that either plant had ever grown indigenously in Egypt. Historians, for their part, insisted that transoceanic communications were unknown and impossible before modern times. But this is not true, as Professor Martin Bernall at Cornell University points out: the Discovery of Norse settlements in Newfoundland in 1965 proved that Vikings had sailed the Atlantic, settling in Newfoundland in around AD 1000, meaning that other, similar voyages could well have been made earlier.
The diffusion of trade could also have occurred from the Americas westwards across the Pacifi. The sweet potato is known to have crossed the Pacific in early times, as did the peanut, which surfaced in western China and pure silk from China is known to have been used in Egypt as early as 1000 BC.
On balance, it seems clear that world trade facilitated the transportation of tobacco and cocaine from the Americas to Egypt either westwards or eastwards prior to 1000 BC."
So in essence it seems to me that a pretty firm argument has been made in this case.
Peace!
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
The problem was he compared native East Africans to Niger Congo Africans, and *not* Cushitic and Nilo Saharans such as the Masai, Oromo, Somali who they in fact physically most closely resembed…
For Howells is means Africans can only look like his stereotypes - and if they don't, then rather than reach the logical conclusion- his stereotypes are proven wrong; he reaches a completely illogical and warped conclusion - that Africans who don't meet his racial stereotypes are not African.
Indeed, his preconceived idea of what tropical Africans should look like, had already clouded his judgement of what specimens to collect in his classifications, because he, like you just pointed out, ignored or left out specimens that would reveal greater variability within tropical Africans. So a tropical African, whose morphology happens to fall into the left-out specimens, would be misclassified into some other ethnic group, which is supposed to have some morphological similarities. This may well link the tropical African to a group that has been separated from Africans for quite a long period, and possibly, genetically more distant than members of a group, who didn't closely bear resemblance to the morphology of the aforementioned tropical African. There is great variability within populations, and as said time and again, there is greater variability within the unscientifically contructed so-called "races" than there is between them.
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: I have this book called the Tutankhamun prophecies by Maurice Cotterell
Here is an except from Pages 31...
Secondly, other evidence likewise supports the notion that trading links between the two coninent of Africa and the Americas were well established during Pharaonic Egypt. In March 1992 German researhers investigating the contents of Egyptian mummies called on the expertise of forensic scientist Dr Svetla Balabanova of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Ulm.
The first mummy to be tested was nicknamed Het-Nut Tawy, 'Lady of the Two Lnads', an Egyptian mummy of the twenty-first dynasty (around 1069 BC) whose coffin was richly decorated with pictures of the sky-goddess Nut. With great surprise Balabaova discovered the presence of large quantities of nicotine and cocaine in samples of this and serveral other mummies kept in the Egyptian Museum in Munich.
At first she believed the find to be a mistake; neither of these drugs was available to Egyptians of the twenty-first dynasty. Tobacco was unknown before the introduction from the West Indies by the followers of Columbus, after AD 1492, while the coca plant which grew only in the Americas was unknown to have travelled eastwards much before Victorian times.
In the spring of 1992 the results of the discoveries were published in the scientific magazine Naturwissenschaften (79, 358, 1992), casing uproar among historians, biologists, archaeologists and anthropologist. If Balabanova was right, then everybody else must be wrong, and therefore even her fellow scientists turned against her, branding her, as so often has happened to leadin-edge scientists throughout history, a heretic.
She had made a mistake, they all agreed. In England sceptical archaeologist Rosalie David, keeper of the Manchester Museum's own collection of mummies, insisted: 'Either the tests had been flawed or the mummies themselves fakes.'
But Balanova was a trained forensic toxicologist. She had often worked with polie on investigations and autopsies. She stood by her methodology. She had used a proven method of analysis known as the 'hair shaft' technique: when a deceased hads consumed a drug, traces are carreied to the protein of the hair shaft follicle, where they remain for ever. The test could be used not only to confirm the presence of a drug but also to rule out any possiblity of contamination of the sample. First the sample was washed in alcohol, then the alcohol was tested to make sure it was clean and free from traces of the drug. Any contamination of the sample by an outside agent must permeate from the outside in. If the alcohol were free of the drug, then any subsequent find of the drug from the same follicle must therefore originate from the inside of the hair follicle, not from outside. This can happen only through consumption of the drug during the deceased's lifetime...
On balance, it seems clear that world trade facilitated the transportation of tobacco and cocaine from the Americas to Egypt either westwards or eastwards prior to 1000 BC."
RU2religious, more of small but significant pieces of information of this sort, is what to needs be looked for, because even though it isn't entirely susceptible to challenging or questioning, it has potential to get somewhere. I'll demonstrate this with the following questions, as examples:
Is it implied that Dr. Balabanova used the following methods, to determine cocaine in the said mummies?>
"But Balanova was a trained forensic toxicologist. She had often worked with polie on investigations and autopsies. She stood by her methodology. She had used a proven method of analysis known as the 'hair shaft' technique: when a deceased hads consumed a drug, traces are carried to the protein of the hair shaft follicle, where they remain for ever. The test could be used not only to confirm the presence of a drug but also to rule out any possiblity of contamination of the sample. First the sample was washed in alcohol, then the alcohol was tested to make sure it was clean and free from traces of the drug. Any contamination of the sample by an outside agent must permeate from the outside in. If the alcohol were free of the drug, then any subsequent find of the drug from the same follicle must therefore originate from the inside of the hair follicle, not from outside. This can happen only through consumption of the drug during the deceased's lifetime..."
If this is "accepted" standard procedure in detecting the presence of drugs in a deceased in law enforcement and autopsies, why would the methodology now be questioned, when the same procedure is applied to Mummies?
Detection of a drug is one thing, establishing its 'specificity' may be another. Does the said procedure not only detect, but also identifies the 'specific' drug in question? If not, is this mentioned above standard/proven procedure followed by another procedure that reveals the identity of the drug, which would have to also be followed in this case of testing the Mummies?
Why would Dr. Balanova initially think that the find must have been a mistake, if she had followed the proven procedure, which has not been determined to have failed before in detecting and identifying drugs? Whatever the odds of coca plant being grown in ancient Egypt, should have no bearings on the "positive-ness" of what she had identified in the mummies.
Although its absense doesn't necessarily disprove the possibility of cocaine coming from contact with the "New World" in antiquity, are there any stories of people from foreign lands, in the 21st Dynasty or other dynasties, as seen in the likes of "the land of Punt", which could indicate the location to be somewhere in the "New World"?
Could the Egyptians have got it from a third party trader, that didn't necessarily come from the "New World"? If so, have those potential parties of 'antiquity' been investigated?
Dr. Balanova stuck to her guns; shows confidence in her abilities and her findings through the proven methods of revealing drugs in the deceased. Could others indeed be wrong? It is certainly "possible"!
quote: Discovery of Norse settlements in Newfoundland in 1965 proved that Vikings had sailed the Atlantic, settling in Newfoundland in around AD 1000, meaning that other, similar voyages could well have been made earlier.
I look at claims of Viking landings in the "New World" in pre-columbian times, with as much critical eye, as I do with the quite possible pre-columbian African landings in the "New World". Have biological remains of Vikings been positively and irrefutably identified and traced back to pre-columbian times? What are the nature of these settlements such that, it cannot be explained in any other way, but only by the presence of accidental European sea travellers? How did the native Americans deal with these foreigners? Did the Vikings make it back, and were they organized enough to leave details/records of such trips back to Europe?
Speaking of utilizing a critical eye, I posted this piece at the beginning of the thread:
Now, digging in a colonial era graveyard in one of the oldest European cities in Mexico, archaeologists have found what they believe are the oldest remains of slaves brought from Africa to the New World. The remains date between the late-16th century and the mid-17th century, not long after Columbus first set foot in the Americas...
The ratios, he explains, were well off the charts for anyone born in Mesoamerica. Instead, they reflected the geology of West Africa, which is underlain by a massive shield of ancient rock, much older than the geology of Mexico and Central America...
African slaves were brought to the New World as the Spanish needed labor to harvest timber and work in the mines that enriched Spain. Early in their rule, the Spanish enslaved Indians to perform heavy labor, but they turned to the African slave trade as diseases introduced by Europeans decimated native peoples.
Article - courtesy of Terry Devitt, and the University of Wisconsin - Madison.
I note that, all that these folks have as evidence, are skeletal remains that they identified as "Africans", for reasons stated. They claim in an unequivocal manner, that these must have been slaves from Africa during the Spanish colonization of the region, because of the dates indicated by radio-carbon dating, which is said to be between 16th century and the mid-17th century. Aside from the idea that these dates go back to the said timeframes, and that Spanish colonizers were in the region sometime during this period, no evidence had been presented whatsoever on the idea of these remains being those of slaves. Is it "possible" they were slaves? Yes. Is it conclusive that they were? Absolutely not!
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I almost forgot to address the contradictions inherent in this earlier claim of Mr. Winters:
quote:Clyde Winters:
Supercar because your learning environment and experiences in schools (kg-16)has instilled in you an appreciation of the superiority of whites over blacks, and acceptance of the myth that **Blacks** only created civilizations in Africa, your outcome expectations is that all research will prove that **Blacks** have developed no civilizations outside Africa. As a result, you can not accept the evidence of **African skeletons** existing among the Olmecs because it would destroy your self-esteem and sense of well being to know that the Afrocentrists, your sworn enemy, actually have evidence that support a recent spread of African civilizations around the world after 4000 BC, because this would mean that all your learning regarding African people is a lie.
What Mr. Winters fails to recognize, is that had he simply called Blacks natives of regions outside Africa as "Blacks", not Africans, he wouldn't be running into the kinds of questioning he has thus far been receiving. But as we can see, Mr. Winters seems to be equating "Blacks" with Africans, and hence, his reference to "African skeletons" among the Olmecs. This issue has nothing to do with "Blacks" creating civilizations outside Africa, but discerning whom you can call "African" and whom it doesn't make sense to, unless members of the said "Non-African" Blacks so choose to do so...in which case, that would be the subjective choice of the said individuals. However, "objectively" Blacks natives anywhere cannot simply be called Africans if not for geographical, political and cultural reasons, but for biological reasons. You simply cannot use "Africans" interchangeably with "Blacks" just about anywhere [outside Africa] there are native Black folks for obvious reasons. I suspect that this is what drives Mr. Winters to push for "recent" African links.
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
The problem was he compared native East Africans to Niger Congo Africans, and *not* Cushitic and Nilo Saharans such as the Masai, Oromo, Somali who they in fact physically most closely resembed…
For Howells is means Africans can only look like his stereotypes - and if they don't, then rather than reach the logical conclusion- his stereotypes are proven wrong; he reaches a completely illogical and warped conclusion - that Africans who don't meet his racial stereotypes are not African.
Indeed, his preconceived idea of what tropical Africans should look like, had already clouded his judgement of what specimens to collect in his classifications, because he, like you just pointed out, ignored or left out specimens that would reveal greater variability within tropical Africans. So a tropical African, whose morphology happens to fall into the left-out specimens, would be misclassified into some other ethnic group, which is supposed to have some morphological similarities. This may well link the tropical African to a group that has been separated from Africans for quite a long period, and possibly, genetically more distant than members of a group, who didn't closely bear resemblance to the morphology of the aforementioned tropical African. There is great variability within populations, and as said time and again, there is greater variability within the unscientifically contructed so-called "races" than there is between them.
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: I have this book called the Tutankhamun prophecies by Maurice Cotterell
Here is an except from Pages 31...
Secondly, other evidence likewise supports the notion that trading links between the two coninent of Africa and the Americas were well established during Pharaonic Egypt. In March 1992 German researhers investigating the contents of Egyptian mummies called on the expertise of forensic scientist Dr Svetla Balabanova of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Ulm.
The first mummy to be tested was nicknamed Het-Nut Tawy, 'Lady of the Two Lnads', an Egyptian mummy of the twenty-first dynasty (around 1069 BC) whose coffin was richly decorated with pictures of the sky-goddess Nut. With great surprise Balabaova discovered the presence of large quantities of nicotine and cocaine in samples of this and serveral other mummies kept in the Egyptian Museum in Munich.
At first she believed the find to be a mistake; neither of these drugs was available to Egyptians of the twenty-first dynasty. Tobacco was unknown before the introduction from the West Indies by the followers of Columbus, after AD 1492, while the coca plant which grew only in the Americas was unknown to have travelled eastwards much before Victorian times.
In the spring of 1992 the results of the discoveries were published in the scientific magazine Naturwissenschaften (79, 358, 1992), casing uproar among historians, biologists, archaeologists and anthropologist. If Balabanova was right, then everybody else must be wrong, and therefore even her fellow scientists turned against her, branding her, as so often has happened to leadin-edge scientists throughout history, a heretic.
She had made a mistake, they all agreed. In England sceptical archaeologist Rosalie David, keeper of the Manchester Museum's own collection of mummies, insisted: 'Either the tests had been flawed or the mummies themselves fakes.'
But Balanova was a trained forensic toxicologist. She had often worked with polie on investigations and autopsies. She stood by her methodology. She had used a proven method of analysis known as the 'hair shaft' technique: when a deceased hads consumed a drug, traces are carreied to the protein of the hair shaft follicle, where they remain for ever. The test could be used not only to confirm the presence of a drug but also to rule out any possiblity of contamination of the sample. First the sample was washed in alcohol, then the alcohol was tested to make sure it was clean and free from traces of the drug. Any contamination of the sample by an outside agent must permeate from the outside in. If the alcohol were free of the drug, then any subsequent find of the drug from the same follicle must therefore originate from the inside of the hair follicle, not from outside. This can happen only through consumption of the drug during the deceased's lifetime...
On balance, it seems clear that world trade facilitated the transportation of tobacco and cocaine from the Americas to Egypt either westwards or eastwards prior to 1000 BC."
RU2religious, more of small but significant pieces of information of this sort, is what to needs be looked for, because even though it isn't entirely susceptible to challenging or questioning, it has potential to get somewhere. I'll demonstrate this with the following questions, as examples:
Is it implied that Dr. Balabanova used the following methods, to determine cocaine in the said mummies?>
"But Balanova was a trained forensic toxicologist. She had often worked with polie on investigations and autopsies. She stood by her methodology. She had used a proven method of analysis known as the 'hair shaft' technique: when a deceased hads consumed a drug, traces are carried to the protein of the hair shaft follicle, where they remain for ever. The test could be used not only to confirm the presence of a drug but also to rule out any possiblity of contamination of the sample. First the sample was washed in alcohol, then the alcohol was tested to make sure it was clean and free from traces of the drug. Any contamination of the sample by an outside agent must permeate from the outside in. If the alcohol were free of the drug, then any subsequent find of the drug from the same follicle must therefore originate from the inside of the hair follicle, not from outside. This can happen only through consumption of the drug during the deceased's lifetime..."
If this is "accepted" standard procedure in detecting the presence of drugs in a deceased in law enforcement and autopsies, why would the methodology now be questioned, when the same procedure is applied to Mummies?
Detection of a drug is one thing, establishing its 'specificity' may be another. Does the said procedure not only detect, but also identifies the 'specific' drug in question? If not, is this mentioned above standard/proven procedure followed by another procedure that reveals the identity of the drug, which would have to also be followed in this case of testing the Mummies?
Why would Dr. Balanova initially think that the find must have been a mistake, if she had followed the proven procedure, which has not been determined to have failed before in detecting and identifying drugs? Whatever the odds of coca plant being grown in ancient Egypt, should have no bearings on the "positive-ness" of what she had identified in the mummies.
Although its absense doesn't necessarily disprove the possibility of cocaine coming from contact with the "New World" in antiquity, are there any stories of people from foreign lands, in the 21st Dynasty or other dynasties, as seen in the likes of "the land of Punt", which could indicate the location to be somewhere in the "New World"?
Could the Egyptians have got it from a third party trader, that didn't necessarily come from the "New World"? If so, have those potential parties of 'antiquity' been investigated?
Dr. Balanova stuck to her guns; shows confidence in her abilities and her findings through the proven methods of revealing drugs in the deceased. Could others indeed be wrong? It is certainly "possible"!
quote: Discovery of Norse settlements in Newfoundland in 1965 proved that Vikings had sailed the Atlantic, settling in Newfoundland in around AD 1000, meaning that other, similar voyages could well have been made earlier.
I look at claims of Viking landings in the "New World" in pre-columbian times, with as much critical eye, as I do with the quite possible pre-columbian African landings in the "New World". Have biological remains of Vikings been positively and irrefutably identified and traced back to pre-columbian times? What are the nature of these settlements such that, it cannot be explained in any other way, but only by the presence of accidental European sea travellers? How did the native Americans deal with these foreigners? Did the Vikings make it back, and were they organized enough to leave details/records of such trips back to Europe?
Speaking of utilizing a critical eye, I posted this piece at the beginning of the thread:
Now, digging in a colonial era graveyard in one of the oldest European cities in Mexico, archaeologists have found what they believe are the oldest remains of slaves brought from Africa to the New World. The remains date between the late-16th century and the mid-17th century, not long after Columbus first set foot in the Americas...
The ratios, he explains, were well off the charts for anyone born in Mesoamerica. Instead, they reflected the geology of West Africa, which is underlain by a massive shield of ancient rock, much older than the geology of Mexico and Central America...
African slaves were brought to the New World as the Spanish needed labor to harvest timber and work in the mines that enriched Spain. Early in their rule, the Spanish enslaved Indians to perform heavy labor, but they turned to the African slave trade as diseases introduced by Europeans decimated native peoples.
Article - courtesy of Terry Devitt, and the University of Wisconsin - Madison.
I note that, all that these folks have as evidence, are skeletal remains that they identified as "Africans", for reasons stated. They claim in an unequivocal manner, that these must have been slaves from Africa during the Spanish colonization of the region, because of the dates indicated by radio-carbon dating, which is said to be between 16th century and the mid-17th century. Aside from the idea that these dates go back to the said timeframes, and that Spanish colonizers were in the region sometime during this period, no evidence had been presented whatsoever on the idea of these remains being those of slaves. Is it "possible" they were slaves? Yes. Is it conclusive that they were? Absolutely not!
I know that this is extremely long but in regards to one of the points that you made which was a very good one:
Supercar quote:
"Could the Egyptians have got it from a third party trader, that didn't necessarily come from the "New World"? If so, have those potential parties of 'antiquity' been investigated?"
Yes this is a strong possiblity but what the author was trying to point out if I'm not mistaken is that Central and South America pyramids and some of the religious belief are very similar to each other. The author was stating that Tutankhamun teaching was brought to the Americas and the Mayans taught the teaching of Tutankhamun in the personage of Quetzalcoatl.
The very next sentence states in the book:
The legend of the feathered snake, together with the super-science which it represented, could have accompanied the transfer of these goods. The undisputable fact remains that the bones of a man, known as the feathered snake to his people, portrayed as a figurine of a bearded white man, who left his knowledge in the form of living miracles encoded into his artefacts, have been found in Mexico 2,000 years after the feathered snake, Tutankhamun, walked the banks of the Nile. The man in the tomb in Mexico was the feathered snake; it was not just a tale, not just a story that had crossed an ocean. Theses super-gods taught the same things at different times."
In another setion of the book it goes to say:
"In Egypt the snake and the vulture (feathers) were marks of royalty, representing the divine blood of kings. But only one king, in Egypt, carried both the snake and feathers on his forehead. This was the boy-king Tutankhamun, who, like Lord Pacal, took to the throne at the age of nine...
Compare the decoded picture of Lord Pacal (plate 16a) as a young boy wearing the feathered hat of Quetzalcoatl with the representation of Tutankhamun, from his tomb in the Valley of the Kings. Both the young king and his bride are touhed by the rays of the sun.
As far as the vikings go... I don't really care about this to much... althought the author was trying to make a point I suppect.
Excellent Post... Supercar
Posts: 951 | From: where rules end and freedom begins | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I know that this is extremely long but in regards to one of the points that you made which was a very good one:
Supercar quote:
"Could the Egyptians have got it from a third party trader, that didn't necessarily come from the "New World"? If so, have those potential parties of 'antiquity' been investigated?"
Yes this is a strong possiblity but what the author was trying to point out if I'm not mistaken is that Central and South America pyramids and some of the religious belief are very similar to each other. The author was stating that Tutankhamun teaching was brought to the Americas and the Mayans taught the teaching of Tutankhamun in the personage of Quetzalcoatl.
The very next sentence states in the book:
The legend of the feathered snake, together with the super-science which it represented, could have accompanied the transfer of these goods. The undisputable fact remains that the bones of a man, known as the feathered snake to his people, portrayed as a figurine of a bearded white man, who left his knowledge in the form of living miracles encoded into his artefacts, have been found in Mexico 2,000 years after the feathered snake, Tutankhamun, walked the banks of the Nile. The man in the tomb in Mexico was the feathered snake; it was not just a tale, not just a story that had crossed an ocean. Theses super-gods taught the same things at different times."
In another setion of the book it goes to say:
"In Egypt the snake and the vulture (feathers) were marks of royalty, representing the divine blood of kings.
But only one king, in Egypt, carried both the snake and feathers on his forehead. This was the boy-king Tutankhamun, who, like Lord Pacal, took to the throne at the age of nine...
Compare the decoded picture of Lord Pacal (plate 16a) as a young boy wearing the feathered hat of Quetzalcoatl with the representation of Tutankhamun, from his tomb in the Valley of the Kings. Both the young king and his bride are touhed by the rays of the sun.
Certainly something that had not been brought to my attention until now. Definitely a possible link that I ought to look into more closely.
quote:RU2religious:
As far as the vikings go... I don't really care about this to much... althought the author was trying to make a point I suppect.
...and yes, that point was not lost on me. I am not too concerned about Viking stories of the "New World" myself, but simply used the author's mentioning of them, to deliver another point that I wanted to make.
-------------------- Truth - a liar penetrating device! Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
A fact that was not in dispute. As I even posted Australian people. Nice strawman.
quote:Sidirom seems DESPERATE you are trying too hard, The CANARY CURRENTS brough WEST AFRIKANS to SOUTH AMERICA, only small groups of WEST AFRIKANS came in order to share their knowledge with the Native South Americans.
Nice try. No evidence. Sorry to inform you that accidental migration by fishermen and what not do not result in archeological and writing being taught to another civilization. Your wishful thinking is very entertaining.
quote:The statue of a Elephant is a Elephant it is NOT a possum, or the numerous other pictures you keep showing. Sidirom must be really be DESPERATE. Sidirom the statue looks like a rabbit,frog,or parrot or is it PINK Dumbo the Mastodon reincarnated because you seem to be delusional.
The points you fail to adress,are that just because you claim it is an elephant does not make it so. Two you have provided no evidence that it is even authentic. No other pottery that is similar. No dating, Nothing. Just a picture.
quote:Your losing the debate Sidirom because the Yellow Fever is a mosquito Problem, is Sidirom claiming mosquitoes originated in Afrika?
Again you show your ignorance. Mosquitos transmit the disease from one human host to another. Before African arrivals we did not have human hosts carrying the disease.
quote:The information you supplied was a poor interpretation of the Scientific Data. When they claimed Probably came from Afrika does that mean All AFrikans are immune to Yellow Fever because I can assure you high numbers of native Afrikans die from Yellow Fever also.
No one claimed full immunity. Nice try. But higher levels of resistance yes.
quote:Your losing the debate Sidirom because your being extremely BIASED and we all see it.{/quote]
You caliming you are winning anything without presenting any strong evidence is worhtless.
[quote]Now after you finished reading Ivan Sertima get back to me because I have not even scratched the surface towards PROOF so I will suggest you read Clyde Winters and Ivan Sertima and see if you still disagree.
LOL pick what ever evidence you want from Van Sertima or Clyde Winters. They have all been addressed before.
quote:Australians were located too far versus West Afrikans who are located just 1-2 weeks away due to the Natural CANARY CURRENTS which leads directly from West Afrika to South America.
You must have forgotten a full coastal route. What a moron. I have already shown plenty of other currents have taken accidental travelers to and from the Americans. This is not enough to constitute a population mifration. Nice try.
quote: Locate west Afrika (Home of the Manding) on the map and follow the red line and notice where it leads, If the line leads to South America then Canary Currents leads from West Afrika to South America
And yet they didn't use it because they weren't aware of America. Neither did the Euproeans. Such is life. No current to bring accidental travelers back to tell the tale.
quote:Which specific Oceanic Currents leads Directly from Australia to South America?
More stupidity.
A coastal route around the North Pacific could have led early explorers to lands later submerged when melting glaciers raised sea levels. The possibility of an Ice Age migration directly across the Pacific is widely discounted, but Polynesians certainly had that capability by 500 A.D., when Hawaii and Easter Island were inhabited.
Peñon Woman was found in Baja California as were the last Pericu lived in Columbus'time as well.
When measuring up and comparing the Pericu skulls, the authors discovered that their owners were not a group of Amerinds like most of the Mexican population since prehistoric times. Instead they had distinct and clear affinities to Southeast Asia and the Pacific rim populations. As such, they would seem to represent another Palaeoamerican population that had lived in isolation for a long time and, moreover, one that had managed to survive until very recently.
The chart below shows that the population most closely related to the Pericu (BCS) by skull measurements are the Lagoa Santa people (PAL) - also known as Lapa Vermelha IV or "Luzia's" people - who lived in Minas Gerais near Belo Horizonte in Brazil around 12,500 years ago.
Results of multivariate analysis of Pericu skulls 1: The principal coordinates represent minimum genetic distances (chart adapted from Gonzalez-Jose, R. Gonzalez-Martin A., Hernandez M., Pucciarelli H.M., Sardi M., Rosales A. and Van der Molen S. 2003. "Craniometric Evidence for Palaeoamerican survival in Baja California", Nature, 425:62-65; and Th. D. Dillehay. 2003. "Tracking the first Americans", Nature, 425:23-24. PERICU GROUP (Baja California Sur, Mexico) BCS Fuegians (Tierra del Fuego, Argenina/Chile) FUEG Patagonians (Argentina) PATA Andean Patagonians (Argentina/Chile) APAT Pampas (Buenos Aires, Argenina) PAM Delta of Parana (eastern Argentina) DPAR Aztecs (Mexico) TLAT Bolivians (Bolivia) BOL Toba (northeastern Argentina) TOBA Calchaqui (northwestern Argentina) CAL Palaeoamericans of Brazil ("Luzia" etc.) PAL Teita (Kenya, Africa) TEITA Dogon (Mali, Africa) DOGON Zulu (South Africa) ZULU Bushmen (South Africa) BUSH Australian aborigines (Australia) AUST Tasmanian aborigines (Tasmania, Australia) TASM Tolai (Melanesia) TOLAI Buriats (East Asia) BURIAT Inuit (Eskimo) (Greenland) ESKI Yauyos (Peru) PERU Arikara (USA) ARIK Ainu (Japan) AINU North Japanese (Japan) NJAP South Japanese (Japan) SJAP Hainan (southern China) HAIN Anyang (Taiwan) ANYA Atayal (eastern China) ATAY Santa Cruz (California, USA) SANT
"Early people might have moved south from the Bering Strait by following a chain of small ice-free areas that existed along the outer Pacific coast," Knut Fladmark, a professor of archaeology at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, told me by e-mail. "Many of those areas would now be underwater."
In 1997, Daryl Fedje, an archaeologist with the Canadian parks system, found a stone tool at a site now 160 feet under water off the coast of British Columbia. The artifact, 10,200 years old, shows that people once lived on that submerged land, Fedje says. Note the northern Jomon. Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: Absolutely right Hotep. And it is also worth noting that some Eurocentrists use those tropical features to define "African" in some sort of racial sense - when it suites their purposes, but then have to abandon the notion when such features and Black peoples turn up all over the ancient world.
Of course you get as close to it as possible by assuming a title "Black People" for people that happen to share certain phenotypes. Such hypocricy. If you are going to claim races, at least be honest about it. I never claim races. just populations by regions.
quote:It's also hypocritical to try to define a tropical disease like Malaria as "African", unless you define the people who carry it - including 100's of millions of Asians and Indians who carry it as also "African."
The disease has its origins in Africa, and thus the title. And the fact is, there is no evidence of Malaria before the arrival of Europeans or Africans. So Africans couldn't have been here before. Your argument is a strawman as well as your purposeful ignoring of the issue of Yellow Fever.
quote:Eurocentric rhetoric is certainly inconsistent, hypocritical and racist, and this is true notwithstanding the issue of hard evidences of West African precense in the America's in pre-Columbian times.
Just like your neo-Afrocentrism disguised as impartialism. I am neither, thank God. having ancestries in all these populations, i could give a damn. But I do like the truth, not robbery of different cultures, for people to feel good about themselves.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: [QB] I have this book called the Tutankhamun prophecies by Maurice Cotterell
"Clearly, it seems likely that cultural contact across the oceans interfused some of the beliefs and customs between the two civilisations. Recent research from various sources suggests trading links existed between Egypt and Mexico.
Hyperdiffusionists are always amusing in their assumptions that possibility equals occurence. It is also possible that Eskimos could have floated to Europe and made contact, but they didn't.
quote: First, ancient Egyptian tomb paintings, from the time of the fourth dynasty Pharaohs in around 2600 BC, depicts paintings of papyrus reed boats that many believed capable of carrying crews, cargoes and legends from the old world Egypt to the new world of central America. Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl believed these primitive boats could survive transoceanic passages. To prove the point he journeyed to Lake Chad, in the Afrian interior, acquiring the skills to build a boat, along the lines of those in the tomb paintin gs, which would cope with the long sea journey.
A few things need to be mentioned. An accidental crossing has been achieved in many rudimentary boats. But luck has a lot to do with it. You have to know of a destination before planning to go towards it. The Ra berely made it across, with destination known, currents charted and modern communications and navigation equipment aboard that boat. A boat specifically constructed with crossing the Atlantic in mind.
quote: Carried by the trade winds and equatorial currents, Ra covered 3,000 miles {4,830 kilometers} in just under eight weeks.
Carrying food and supplies planned ahead because they knew their destination. Even Columbus, almost starved before getting to the Americas.
quote: But defects in the steering gear and inferior structural techniques used to bind the reeds dogged the voyage. Ra foundered, suffering damage in a Caribbean storm, and sank. Undeterred, Heyerdahl modified the design of his craft, taking note of reed boats built by the Bolivians Peruvians on the shores of Lake Titicaca in South America.
Which means it no longer was a true Egyptian craft, but one made by Bolivians. Techniques that originated in the coast of Peru where they use them to make totora boats that they surf waves with.
quote:Heyerdahl had shown that voyages like this could have been made 3,000 years ago. Coulda woulda. The Chinese were the most advanced sailors in the world at the time of Columbus and had the full capacity to do the crossing, yet they didn't. Possibility does not equal to occurrence.
[quote] Secondly, other evidence likewise supports the notion that trading links between the two coninent of Africa and the Americas were well established during Pharaonic Egypt. In March 1992 German researhers investigating the contents of Egyptian mummies called on the expertise of forensic scientist Dr Svetla Balabanova of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Ulm.
The first mummy to be tested was nicknamed Het-Nut Tawy, 'Lady of the Two Lnads', an Egyptian mummy of the twenty-first dynasty {around 1069 BC} whose coffin was richly decorated with pictures of the sky-goddess Nut. With great surprise Balabaova discovered the presence of large quantities of nicotine and cocaine in samples of this and serveral other mummies kkept in the Egyptian Museum in Munich.
Again, the assumption is that cocaine and nicotine can only be found in coca and tobacco leaves. An incorrect assumption.
Before the voyages of Christopher Columbus cocaine was not known in the Old World and hashish was not known in the Americas. The identification of cocaine in Egyptian mummies has therefore been interpreted by some as proof that there was pre-Columbian contact between Egypt and South America.
The Evidence
The German research group published their initial findings in 1992. [11] Balabanova, an experienced forensic chemist, used radioimmunoassay and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry {GC/MS} to identify and confirm the presence of cocaine, nicotine and hashish in Egyptian mummies. The remains used in this study included 7 mummified heads {all adults, 2 females, 5 males}, 1 single complete adult female and 1 incomplete adult male. All the mummies tested were from the Egyptian Museum, Munich and they had been dated to a period spanning 1070BC – 395AD. Cocaine and hashish were also found in all 9 samples and nicotine was present in all but one of the samples tested.
In February 1993 the group published a second, more comprehensive, paper on their findings in The Lancet [12]. This included their analysis of 72 Peruvian {200 - 1500AD} and 11 Egyptian {1070BC – 395AD} mummies and also skeletal tissue from the Sudan {2 individuals, 5000 - 4000BC and 400 - 1400AD} and South Germany {10 individuals, 2500BC}.
Their data {Table 1} showed that cocaine, nicotine and hashish could be identified in samples obtained from some, but not all, of the Peruvian and Egyptian mummies that were tested. They also identified nicotine in the bones of both individuals from the Sudan and in 8 out of 10 of the individuals from the German "Bell" culture. The levels of cocaine discovered in the hair of Peruvian mummies were found to be similar to the levels found in modern day German drug addicts and this would indicate that the degradation of the drug does not occur significantly over time. The Egyptian mummies were found to have approximately 75 times less cocaine than the maximal amounts identified in modern day German drug addicts.
The results were published without any interpretation of the data indicating how these drugs came to be present in locations so distant to their natural source. The drug tests had proven positive and so it was up to the wider academic community to make sense of them. Comments and criticisms concerning the data were quickly published in the letters pages of the respective journals. [13 & 14] Understandably the comments focused on the possible interpretations of the evidence and doubts were raised concerning the methods used, the authenticity of the mummies and the possibility of later contamination.
Interpretations
The controversy surrounding the evidence for cocaine in Egyptian mummies led to a Channel 4 {UK} "Equinox" television programme [10] and it has also prompted several speculative articles in magazines and on the internet [15 - 21], most of which have used the evidence for cocaine in Egyptian mummies as the proverbial "smoking gun" that there were ancient trade routes between the Americas and Egypt. After all there are pyramids and hieroglyphs on either side of the Atlantic so it is difficult to comprehend why the experts are so reluctant to accept that trade links were established between these cultures and then lost at a later point in history.
Historians remain entirely unconvinced of ancient trade links between the old and new worlds because none of the principle domestic species {other than the dog} are found in the Americas prior to the arrival of Columbus. Native Americans had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys or camels whilst new world domesticates such as the llama, guinea pigs, maize, white potatoes, sweet potatoes, peanuts, tomatoes, squash {incl. pumpkin}, pineapples, papaya and avocados were absent from the old world. [23] In addition iron, steel, glass and silk were not used in the Americas prior to 1492. If trade had existed between Egypt and the Americas it would be incredibly unlikely that it would be restricted to plants that produced drugs and not essential food crops and farm animals. Furthermore, the differences between Mayan and Egyptian hieroglyphs and the vast differences in the designs, building materials and purpose of pyramids between Egypt and the Americas indicates that there was not a shared legacy between these cultures.
Academic historians may accept the possibility that a single Roman ship may have become lost in storms and drifted across the Atlantic. [24] However the contention that there were established links between the old and new worlds prior to Columbus is understandably considered absurd.
Even so there must be adequate explanations that can account for the presence of hashish, nicotine and cocaine in the mummies analysed by Dr Svetlana Balabanova that do not depend on the conviction that the ancient Egyptians and Americans traded drugs across the Atlantic. To evaluate this evidence further I contacted Prof. Wolfgang Pirsig and Prof Svetlana Balabanova, Dr Franz Parsche sadly died in an accident in 1995.
What assurances can you give that all the mummies tested for the presence of these drugs were genuine {not fakes}?
Prof. Wolfgang Pirsig: In 1989 I asked Dr. Balabanova whether she could investigate drugs in Egyptian mummies {total cadavers, heads and skulls} of the Mook collection in the Staatssammlung of the University of Munich. The Mook collection was brought to Munich in the late nineteenth century and included remains from Thebes and Abydos. The way of mummification {especially the way of brain removal} showed me that the mummies were genuine. In the Staatssammlung there are around 120 heads and skulls from pre-Colombian Peruvian mummies which were brought to Munich after excavations from 4 cemeteries in the 1930s by members of the Munich University, so that there is no doubt about their genuineness, too. I had studied this material with different questions, one is the deformation of the skull by bandaging in infancy, which was present in about 95% of the skulls, a good evidence for genuineness. Dr. Balabanova had investigated mummies from other areas of the world but I cannot tell you anything about the genuineness of this material.
Dr. Svetlana Balabanova: The source of the artificially mummified bodies from Egypt was the Egyptian Museum in Berlin. The remains of the naturally mummified bodies from Egyptian Nubia were made available to us by Prof. Strouhal, Historical Museum Vienna. Dr Rosalie David has confirmed the authenticity of the mummies.
Is it possible that the presence of these drugs could be explained as intermediary compounds or breakdown products of other common, known biochemicals?
WP: According to my knowledge cocaine, THC and nicotine and their metabolites have their origin only in plants, and there is no way how they can result from other natural processes.
SB: It is not known that cocaine or nicotine can be intermediary compounds or breakdown products.
Is it known whether cocaine, THC and nicotine are stable enough compounds to withstand biochemical or microbial degradation over long periods of time {up to 3,000 years}?
WP: Cocaine has been cultivated in Peru since over 3,000 years. I don’t know how old the oldest known coca-leaves in other museums are. In the Munich collection there is one complete mummy head with a coca-leaves ball in the mouth, from which Dr. Parsche had found cocaine. Quick dehydration of the deceased by whatever method seems to be the best way to enable survival over thousands of years of these drugs which were incorporated in living tissues.
SB: It is not ascertainable if the cocaine and nicotine amounts measured in body tissues and hair represent the original values immediately after death or if the amounts reduced during the centuries. It is also not known if cocaine or nicotine are products of microbial degradation over long periods of time {up to 3,000 years}. However, it is known that burning of incense through reactions of olivetol and verbenol arise THC {D. Martinez et al. "Weihrauch and Myrrhe". WVG, Stuttgart, 1988}.
Do the analytical techniques employed preclude the possibility of misidentification?
SB: The amount of drugs determined by radioimmunoassay is the sum of the drug and its metabolites. However, the proof of a metabolite indicates also the use of the drug. The results of my studies were verified by GC/MS. This method is absolutely specific and precludes misidentification.
How sure can we be that the techniques employed in the identification of these drugs {radioimmunoassay and GC/MS} are reliable and consistent?
WP: The analytic methods of Dr. Balabanova were trained over many years in hair, sweat and dresses of living drug addicts before I brought her the first hairs of Egyptian mummies. Therefore, misinterpretation of her analytical results would appear extremely improbable.
SB: The samples were stored since their excavation under homogenous conditions. The conditions in the laboratory were again homogenous and the samples were simultaneously investigated. Before the investigations, all samples were carefully washed with distilled water and alcohol. The washing water was tested and was cocaine negative. Also all chemicals were cocaine negative. The sample extracts were applied to the GC/MS after it was carefully rinsed with chloroform, until no traces of cocaine or its metabolites were detected any more. If the amount measured were results of contamination, all samples should have been positive. However, only parts were positive.
Is this scientific evidence so watertight that it could withstand legal testimony?
WP: Dr. Balabanovas expertise in analysing drugs in the hair of drug addicts was performed in context with forensic investigations ordered by Justice and the German State without any profit background. Insofar I would term her evidence a legal one.
Can we be certain that these drugs were present at the time of death or is it possible they were introduced into the mummified body either during the embalming process or by later modern contamination?
WP: Some drugs were incorporated during the lifetime, otherwise they cannot be present in the depth of teeth or bones. Some drugs may have contacted the cadaver during the application of some drug containing oil or ointment, which invaded for instance the skin or mucosa. Some drugs in the form of plant leaves or flowers have been added during or after the mummification process {as in the mummy of Ramses II in Paris}. Of course, in our time, the excavator can add nicotine by smoking during his excavating work and scattering the ashes of the cigarette over the mummy {which is very unusual!}, but this nicotine is washed away during the analytic procedures from the hair or bone.
SB: The influence of environmental factors on the substances deposed in the different body tissues post-mortem has not yet been clarified. Ambient moisture, decomposition processes and embalming practice may play a role. We have demonstrated that in artificially mummified bodies from ancient Egypt the nicotine concentrations were significantly higher than those found in the naturally mummified bodies. This indicates that the alkaloid was, possibly, used post-mortem at the embalming procedure. In addition, in the artificially mummified bodies the levels of cotinine, the first nicotine metabolite, were also lower than those measured in naturally mummified bodies. This indicated that nicotine was used ante-mortem and metabolised to cotinine.
Does the analysis of the hair shafts indicate that cocaine, THC and nicotine were consumed over a period of time of the life of particular mummies?
WP: If a drug is inside the hair it has come into the hair during the lifetime. In recent people Dr. Balabanova found a type of timetable according to the intake of the drugs. If the drug addict is clean for a time and then starts again, one can show the interruption in long enough hairs. Due to the small specimens of mummy hair such a timetable could not be shown in the ancient hair.
SB: The presence of drugs in hair demonstrates its use ante-mortem. The drugs are transferred in the hair shafts approximately one month after use. The investigated artificially mummified Egyptians were unfortunately without hair.
The cocaine concentrations found in artificially mummified bodies from Egypt, dated from 1070BC to 395AD, ranged from 24ng/g to 441ng/g. [12] Cocaine was found too in skeletal samples from 71 individuals without traces of artificially embalming procedure, from Egyptian Nubia, dated 600AD to 1100AD. The alkaloid was found in 56 individuals ranged from 0 to 59 years, the highest cocaine values were detected in the group of 1 to 6 year-old children {82ng/g}. Up to the age of 22 years the concentrations decreased to 52ng/g. Then after a new increase up to 67ng/g, at the age of 39 years the cocaine amounts decreased steadily. The highest levels found in the children aged 1 to 6 years suggested that the alkaloid was used as a tranquilliser or may be of maternal origin, too. It is possible, that it was used by the mothers as reinforcer and transferred across the placenta or through the mother’s milk to the infants. To the end of the breast-feed the cocaine amounts decreased. The following increase may be related to the cocaine use as reinforced at the beginning of the working process.
Do these results indicate that these mummies were drug users or that they were an after effect of the embalming process?
WP: The people used drugs by inhaling or chewing before they were mummified, but I cannot exclude the additional invasion of some drugs into the skin of the deceased during the mummification process via some drug containing oil or ointment. We only have sparse information on the mummification process. Herodotus {450BC} only mentioned some details of the mummification techniques, which were poor in Herodotus’ time compared to the techniques and quality of mummification performed thousands of years earlier.
SB: The results indicated that the drugs were used ante, or possibly, post-mortem, in religious rituals, as medication or at the embalming procedure and not as cocaine users.
Have these results been verified by an independent laboratory?
SB: The samples were investigated in my laboratory, by my doctoral candidates and with my apparatus. The GC/MS measurements were performed in the laboratory of the Federal Armed Forces, Munich, Analytical-biochemical laboratory Prof. Adlkofer, Munich, the State criminal office, Stuttgart and by the Children’s Hospital, Ulm.
Are there any plant sources known to have been available to the Ancient Egyptians between 1070BC - 395AD containing nicotine, cocaine, or THC?
WP: For nicotine the two articles of Balabanova contain references of plants containing nicotine in this period, but nobody has proven this exactly with a contemporary map of plants for Egypt.
SB: It is known that cocaine is the principal alkaloid of the leaves of Erythroxylum coca. Cocaine is present also in other Erythroxylum species native to South Africa, Madagascar and Mauritius in amounts less than those found in Erythroxylum coca. However, it is possible that in antiquity a way to concentrate cocaine was known. Professor Michael Montagne reported that South American shamans concentrated nicotine routinely into a thick black syrup. Moreover, it is also possible, that in ancient Egypt, plants containing cocaine were present. Furthermore, it cannot be ruled out that the coca plant was possibly imported to Africa before Columbus. Although trade relations between the New World and Africa are not known, the existence of links between the continents cannot be rejected. The Norwegian anthropologist Thor Heyerdahl crossed the Atlantic in an Egyptian reed boat. Possibly ancient people navigated South American rivers to the Atlantic, crossed the ocean and reached the African continent. Recently a pre-Colombian, earthen Roman head was found in Central America. Recent investigations of a mummy found in Florida, aged 7,000 years, demonstrated identical genotype with those of Asiatic race, but not with those of native Americans {S. Pääbo "Ancient DNA" Scientific American, November 1993: 64}. These facts are possibly also evidence for trans-Atlantic relations.
Is it possible that Ancient Egyptian traders could have obtained any such plants from elsewhere in Africa, the Mediterranean or the Middle East?
WP: Yes, possible, but not proven. Some plants could be imported from Asia.
Is it possible that plants yielding the required amounts of these drugs may have been present in the past and have become extinct?
WP: Yes, the destruction of nature today is the best evidence, and nature had been destroyed also in ancient times.
SB: It is possible that plants containing the alkaloids were present and used in Ancient Egypt.
Are there any plant sources of THC known to have been available in Peru between 200 and 1500AD?
WP: We have not investigated this question.
Do these results support an established trans-Atlantic trading route between Egypt and South America that predates Columbus {1492AD}?
WP: No, this conclusion cannot be made from the Ulm findings.
Could they indicate the possibility of a distant trading route across the Pacific between South America, Asia and Africa?
WP: No, this conclusion cannot be made from the Ulm findings.
Do you favour any particular interpretation of your results?
WP: As the Ulm findings are gained from a few specimens of a few sites in the huge world without other contemporary background information I don’t dare to interpret them in any particular cultural context.
Sources of Cannabis
The discovery of THC in Egyptian mummies is not surprising considering that cannabis is indigenous to the Middle East. There is general consensus that the Ancient Egyptian word "shemshemet" means cannabis. There is also cited evidence of cannabis use in the pyramid texts and cannabis is thought to have been used as a drug since pharaonic times. [25] Hemp has been found in the tomb of Amenophis III {1382 - 1344BC} and cannabis pollen has also been identified on the mummy of Ramses II {1279 - 1213BC}. [13 & 25]
Sources of Nicotine
Whilst nicotine is an abundant alkaloid in tobacco plants {Nicotiana tabacum} it is also present in relatively small amounts in some Old World plants including Belladonna {Atropa bella-donna}, Celery {Apium graveolens} and Jimsonweed {Datum stramonium}. [26] Nicotine and its metabolites have also been identified in human remains and in pipes from the Near East and Africa. However the only direct evidence of habitual tobacco use in the Ancient world has been found in the Americas. [6]
Balabanova has reviewed early evidence for the origins of tobacco in Europe and Asia prior to Columbus’ voyages to the Americas. [27] Pre-Christian pipes made from clay, wood, bronze and iron have been found in Switzerland, France and Germany. "Bauerntabak", literally farmers tobacco, was described in several European herbals written in the sixteenth century and was classified, along with Nicotiana tabacum as either a type of “bilsenkraut” or as a kind of Hyoscyamus. From the seventeenth century farmers tobacco became known as Nicotiana rustica and was erroneously accepted as being of American origin when wild and domesticated varieties were already known in Europe prior to Columbus. Farmers tobacco may have had Asiatic origins, Conrad Gesner considered in 1561 that it had been imported from Syria and it has also been maintained that the Persians were also aware of this type of tobacco. Nicotiana fruticosa is also known to grow in regions of China, where it was domesticated and was known by its Chinese names “cay-thüóc-än” and “yen-yé”.
Additionally a species of tobacco, Nicotiana africana, has recently been identified as indigenous to Namibia in South West Africa. It is therefore not unreasonable to suspect that other species of tobacco may have grown in Egypt, or in the surrounding regions, and that this could account for the high amounts of nicotine identified in these Egyptian mummies.
Another possibility is that the presence of nicotine and the traces of tobacco leaves found in Ramses II mummy may have resulted from the use of tobacco sprays as an insecticide to conserve the mummies whilst they were stored in museums in the nineteenth century. [28] Mummies are prone to insect infestation following entombment or exhumation and museums continue to wage war against insect pests. In recent investigations at least three different species of beetle including Thylodrias contractus Mots, Tyrophagus sp. and Lassioderma serricorne {F.} have been identified from the mummy of Ramses II. Most speculation has centred on L. serricorne due to its common name, the tobacco beetle. This species was first recorded in the U.S.A. in 1886 but has several similar forms in the Old World and it is also often found as a pest in museum collections.
Tobacco has been used as an insecticide in Europe since 1763 and so it would not have been unusual for it to have been applied to the mummy of Ramses II for conservation. The mummy of Ramses II was subjected to a mercury bath to de-louse it whilst it was kept in the Cairo museum. [28] The preparation of the mummy began by “washing with a decoction of tobacco-leaves in a strong lye”. Mummies are also often moved around between museums and other storage locations where contamination may occur. So even though the post excavation history of a mummy may appear well documented this has not always been the case.
Although there is good evidence to indicate that nicotine may have been identified in mummies following its application as an insecticide there is an alternative explanation which Balabanova favours. This is that the origin of the nicotine is the result of a post mortem application to the mummy, which may have occurred during the process of embalming. [29] In this study Balabanova compared the amounts of nicotine identified in artificially and naturally mummified bodies from ancient Egypt with the amounts found in modern-day humans. The highest nicotine concentrations were found in artificially mummified Egyptians {mean value = 1330ng/g} compared with 47ng/g in natural mummies, 77ng/g in European bronze age remains and 38ng/g in modern day accident victims. However the ratio of nicotine to its metabolised component cotinine indicates that the high concentrations of nicotine in artificial mummies is due to the embalming process. Artificially mummified bodies contain on average 3.4% cotinine compared to 40.3% in natural mummified bodies, 34.3% in European bronze age remains and 596% in modern day accident victims. This is indicative that the nicotine in the artificial mummies was not through its consumption whilst they were alive but through its post mortem application.
Nicotine has a half-life in the human body of 1 - 3 hours, its co-metabolite, cotinine, has a half-life of 8 - 10 hours. [30] Cotinine is produced in vivo and is indicative of the presence of nicotine in living tissue. Of 144 individuals tested by radioimmunoassay 140 {97%} were positive for cotinine. However, due to the presence of nicotine in many common plants and vegetables their dietary contribution must be taken into account. A cut off value of 0.4ng/mg cotinine is commonly used to distinguish between modern day smokers and non-smokers. As the nicotine level of native tobacco is up to 4 times higher than modern commercial brands Cartmell et al [30] chose to use a higher cut off value of 2ng/mg cotinine, this indicated that 67 samples {47%} were due to tobacco use.
Sources of Cocaine
The first ever identification of cocaine in mummified remains came in 1991 and was made by Dr Larry Cartmell. [31] From the 8 mummies tested {all from South America}, 4 samples from the Chinchorro culture, a coastal people unlikely to have had access to coca leaf, and 2 samples from sub adult mummies from the Azapa valley near Arica were negative for the presence of cocaine. The 2 samples that tested positive for cocaine were from the Camarones Valley in Northern Chile. One sample was from a 25 year-old woman and the other a 3 year-old boy. It is supposed that the boy acquired the cocaine from his mother’s milk or as a medicine.
The use of coca leaf was restricted during the reign of Inca Roca ca. 1230AD although the farming of coca did not come under state control for another two hundred years. [32] By this time the plant had acquired a revered status and was utilised in religious ceremonies. The use of coca was spread from royalty to the nobility and lower classes up until the Spanish conquest when coca was used by all but the lowest class in Inca culture. Following the conquest of the Inca Empire coca-leaf chewing became further widespread to alleviate the fatigue and hunger felt by the common people and these remain the main reasons for the continued popularity of the habit. The history of coca use prior to the time of the Inca is not so well understood but it can be studied by analysing mummies and artefacts obtained from archaeological sites.
In modern times typically 20 - 60g coca leaf may be consumed per day equating to 200 - 300mg cocaine. These amounts approach the lower levels of cocaine found in cocaine addicts. Cocaine typically has a half-life in the human body measurable in minutes. However benzoylecgonine {BZE}, a metabolite of cocaine, can be detected in hair shafts using the techniques of radioimmunoassay and GC/MS. Using these methods Cartmell investigated 163 mummies from 7 different cultures from Chile which spanned a period of 4,000 years. [32] A conservative value of 5ng/mg was employed to differentiate between positive and negative cocaine results as this value is used in clinical studies.
Of the 23 individuals from the Chinchorro culture {samples dated from 3000 – 2000BC} and 3 individuals from Quiani culture {1500 – 1250BC} none were positive for BZE. However Cartmell identified one individual from the Alto Ramirez {350 - 250BC}, 10 from Cabuza {400 - 1000AD}, 54 from Maitas Chiribaya {1100 – 1250AD}, 2 from San Miguel {1200 – 1350AD} and 9 from “Inca” {1400 – 1500AD} cultures.
The earliest archaeological evidence indicates that coca use started with the Valdivia culture in Ecuador ca 2100BC from where its use spread southwards. The BZE tests indicate that the Chinchorro culture did not consume coca leaf. Coca was grown in northern Peru ca 2100BC but there is little reason to suppose that the Chinchorro traded with their Peruvian neighbours. However the results indicated that some coca use was practised 2,000 years ago.
The methods by which drugs enter the hair shaft are still not fully understood. It is possible that drugs may be transferred to the hair via the follicle, in sweat, from the sebaceous glands or across the skin. Drugs may enter the hair shaft after passing from arterial capillaries to the matrix cells in the base of the hair follicle. As these cells move along the shaft they die and become incorporated in the keratin. [33] Cocaine and its metabolites; ecgonine and BZE have been identified in sweat up to 48 hours after ingestion. It is therefore possible that cocaine excreted in sweat could be transferred to the hair. Cocaine has also been detected in drug free hair that was held tightly in the palm of a hand of a cocaine-dosed individual for 30 minutes thus indicating that the drug can enter the hair shaft without it having been consumed by the bearer of the hair.
One problem with using hair tests to confirm the presence of drugs is that of external contamination. [33] Smoke has been known to contaminate hair with both cocaine and nicotine giving false positive results. Ante mortem contamination may result from smoke or an external application {for example medicinal or ceremonial}. Post mortem contamination could result during the funeral process, through the use of embalming fluids, via contamination during the period of burial, due to leaching from grave goods, during post excavation and curation processes, as a result of tobacco use by staff or during post excavation storage. External contamination can however be checked by testing the rinse washes of hair material for the presence of drugs.
Cartmell et al have tested 18 mummies excavated from the Egyptian oasis of Dakhleh in the western Sahara for the presence of cocaine and nicotine. [34] All samples were negative for cocaine, whilst 14 individuals tested positive for nicotine. The positive nicotine values ranged from 0.7 – 2.2ng/mg of hair and were therefore considered to be consistent with dietary sources of nicotine, for which a cut off value of 2ng/mg is commonly used.
Cartmell has approached Balabanova in an attempt to replicate her results in his own laboratory but according to Balabanova this request did not reach her. [34] It is important at this point to note that Balabanova's data is recorded in ng/g {nanograms per gram} whereas Cartmell records his data in ng/mg {nanograms per milligram} ie a difference of 1,000-fold. Balabanova's cocaine data from Egyptian mummies equates to maximal levels of less than 0.5ng/mg and the maximal amounts of nicotine are less than 1.05ng/mg. Both values would therefore prove negative using modern thresholds for drug testing. In addition it is apparent that the values for nicotine determined by Balabanova would also fall within the dietary limits {< 2ng/mg} imposed by Cartmell.
Cocaine is produced in quantity exclusively by Erythroxylum species native to South America [8 & 35 - 37]. However the genus Erythroxylon contains over 200 species distributed throughout the tropics including the Americas, Asia, South Africa, Madagascar and Australia. Some of these species produce cocaine although in much smaller amounts than in the South American species. [38 - 42] E. brownianum for instance is a species native to South Africa which produces 400ppm {parts per million – equivalent to 0.4mg/g} cocaine in its leaves. [40] E. monogynum, red cedar, is native to India and contains up to 400ppm cocaine in its roots. [40] The shoots and leaves from this plant are also edible. It is possible that the Ancient Egyptians could have had access to these species of plant or even that there were related species present in Egypt that produced cocaine in sufficient quantity to account for the amounts identified.
The constituents of the embalming oils used by the Ancient Egyptian embalmers have not been recorded in their texts. However, Herodotus {writing in the fifth century BC} recorded the materials and various treatments used during that time. Embalmers had learned through experience that the human body could be preserved by removing the internal organs {intestines, liver, lungs and stomach} and by applying salts, resins, cedar oil, palm wine, myrrh, cassia, gum, honey and bitumen. [43]
Buckley and Evershed [44] have investigated the constituents of balms used on Egyptian mummies {1900BC – 395AD} using GC/MS. The main constituents of which were acyl lipids, which are most likely from plant oils as their constituent fatty acid composition indicates {there is a greater prevalence of palmitate as opposed to stearate}. The use of unsaturated oils enabled the embalmers to dry or rather spontaneously polymerise their remains, this property was also utilised by European oil painters. This helped to protect the wrappings against microbial invasion. Coniferous resins were identified by the presence of diterpenoid components and although used as early as 2200BC their use became more common during the Roman period. Beeswax has been identified by the presence of alkanes {C25 - C33}, wax esters {C40 - C50} and hydroxy wax esters {C42 - C54} and was used in increasing amounts from ca. 1000BC until the Roman era. Beeswax was presumably chosen for its sealant and anti-microbial properties as well as its symbolic significance. It is also worth noting that the Coptic word for wax is ‘mum’. In addition balsmic resin, bitumen, pistacia/triterpenoid resin and plant oils were also identified as constituent components in the mummies examined. It is apparent that we still do not know all there is to know about Egyptian mummification and caution should be exercised before making assumptions as to the art of the embalmers.
Herodotus recorded the earliest circumnavigation of Africa, which was achieved by Phoenician sailors. [45] They had been commissioned by the Egyptian Pharaoh Necho II {ca 615 - 595BC} to sail from the Red Sea down the eastern coast of Africa and to determine whether Africa was surrounded by sea. They achieved their task in three years returning via the Pillars of Hercules. However Herodotus refused to believe their claims as they had stated that the sun was on their right hand side as they sailed round the southern coast. This statement made by the Phoenicians is now considered to be proof of the veracity of their voyage.
Lapis lazuli, which comes from the mountains of Badakshan in Afganistan was found by Flinders Petrie in some early Naqada II tombs {ca 3500BC}. Imports of lapis lazuli indicate that Ancient Egyptian trading extended at least as far as Afghanistan and that trade routes crossed land and ocean via the Persian Gulf to Sumer. [46]
Evidence of direct trade between India and Egypt prior to the Roman era is mostly speculative. However the Romans developed important trade relations with India following the incorporation of Egypt in their Empire. This enabled them to use Egypt as an important intermediary to facilitate trade across the Indian Ocean. [47 & 48] Berenike, 500 miles south of Suez, became established as an important harbour for Roman trade with India and archaeological evidence indicates that the site was used between the third century BC and sixth century AD. [49] Prior to the establishment of this port and the utilisation by the Romans of a sea route to India their trade had passed overland through modern day Syria and Turkey.
There is sufficient evidence therefore to indicate that the ancient Egyptians could have obtained plants, spices or timber from locations as far afield as India, Afghanistan and the coasts of Africa.
Discussion
To summarise there are a number of explanations which may account for the identification of cocaine, THC and nicotine in Egyptian mummies. The identification of THC is not considered unusual due to the local prevalence of C. sativa in the Middle East. In addition we know that the Egyptians utilised hemp to make ropes and THC can also be produced by reactions that occur when burning incense.
The presence of nicotine can be accounted for, as nicotine is present in small amounts in many plants commonly used as food. It is therefore fairly common for human remains to contain residual amounts of nicotine. The use of tobacco based insecticide sprays during the nineteenth century may account for the discovery of tobacco leaves in the mummy of Ramses II as well as for the identification of higher levels of nicotine in mummies that have been kept in museums over long periods of time. Amongst the resins and plant oils used by Ancient Egyptian embalmers there may have been plants, which contained significant amounts of nicotine. This contention is supported by Balabanova's discovery that the proportion of cotinine to nicotine in artificially mummified Egyptian remains is significantly less {3.4% vs 40.3%} than in naturally mummified remains. [29]
The discovery of cocaine in Egyptian mummies is however not so easy to account for as no direct evidence unequivocally supports any particular contention. Although it is possible that experimental error or modern fake mummies could account for these results both of these explanations are highly unlikely. The authenticity of the mummies has been confirmed by independent experts, the methods employed by Balabanova are reliable and are also used by forensic departments around the world. In addition Balabanova's results were confirmed by GC/MS at four different laboratories.
However, there is no reason to suppose that the cocaine identified by Balabanova in Egyptian mummies originated in South America because there are cocaine producing Erythroxylum species, which are indigenous to regions of Africa, India and Asia. The hypothesis that trade routes existed between Egypt and South America simply cannot be substantiated with any corroborative evidence and it would be incredibly unlikely that if links had existed that trade would have been restricted to plants that could be used as drugs. Furthermore, the use of such drugs by indigenous cultures is often associated with their religious beliefs and drugs are often revered as gifts from the gods. It would therefore be unusual for a culture to use particular drugs and to not make reference to their effects in their texts and legends.
It is certainly feasible that plants containing cocaine were present in Ancient Egypt as there are examples of flora known to have grown there which subsequently became extinct, although some have been reintroduced. These include: both the blue and white water lilies, the "Ished" Tree {modern persea}; a sacred tree on whose leaves the name of Pharaoh was inscribed to guarantee him a long life, the carob {Ceratonia siliqua}, the Christ's Thorn {Ziziphus spina} and the Stone Pine {Pinus pinea}. If the heraldic flower of the South was a real plant {and some believe that it was invented}, the most likely candidate is the so-called Madonna lily {Lilium candidum}.
Cocaine containing plants, such as E. monogynum, which is present in India, could have been acquired by the ancient Egyptians or in neighbouring areas which the Egyptians traded with.
A hypothesis can be proposed whereby cocaine containing plants could have been utilised by the ancient Egyptians when preparing their embalming oils, constituents from these oils could have permeated muscle tissue and hair over long periods of time and thus account for their detection by highly sensitive modern techniques. This hypothesis could be examined by applying plant oils and resins, containing cocaine and nicotine, to drug free hair and then subjecting the hair samples to drug tests. The isotopic signatures of the drugs may be used to determine their geographical origin. [51] However, it would require permission from the Munich museum to obtain additional samples from their mummies for analysis and there would surely be complications arising from testing and comparing the small amounts that could be derived from human remains with relatively pure modern plant samples.
Most importantly it's been noted that the identification of cocaine in Egyptian mummies needs to be verified by researchers from an independent laboratory. [52] The only Egyptian mummies to have tested positive for cocaine originate from the Munich museum and these samples all passed through Balabanova's laboratory. Whilst it is unlikely, the possibility exists that some of these samples were incorrectly labelled. Unlikely as this may be, such a mislabelling occurred in the UK with samples of cows and sheep brains becoming mixed up resulting in dire consequences for BSE research. It is therefore important that for the identification of cocaine in Egyptian mummies to become accepted that fresh samples from the Munich museum be acquired and tested by an independent laboratory. Until this occurs the possibility of contamination, mislabelling or misidentification of cocaine from these samples remains.
quote: The diffusion of trade could also have occurred from the Americas westwards across the Pacifi. The sweet potato is known to have crossed the Pacific in early times, as did the peanut, which surfaced in western China and pure silk from China is known to have been used in Egypt as early as 1000 BC.
Yes the sweet potato is a mystery. The question would be if any Polynesian staples made it to the Americas.We do know that Polynesians acquired the crops somewhere around 300 to 700 AD. What does this have to do with West Africa? http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A1984421 Penuts do not show up in Africa until the Portuguese introduce them.
quote: On balance, it seems clear that world trade facilitated the transportation of tobacco and cocaine from the Americas to Egypt either westwards or eastwards prior to 1000 BC." So in essence it seems to me that a pretty firm argument has been made in this case.
Still wishful thinking.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: I note that, all that these folks have as evidence, are skeletal remains that they identified as "Africans", for reasons stated. They claim in an unequivocal manner, that these must have been slaves from Africa during the Spanish colonization of the region, because of the dates indicated by radio-carbon dating, which is said to be between 16th century and the mid-17th century. Aside from the idea that these dates go back to the said timeframes, and that Spanish colonizers were in the region sometime during this period, no evidence had been presented whatsoever on the idea of these remains being those of slaves. Is it "possible" they were slaves? Yes. Is it conclusive that they were? Absolutely not!
But unless you can find skeletal remains from before the slavery period. Then chancves are they didn't just magically appear, and they came or around the time of the colonizers.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by RU2religious: Discovery of Norse settlements in Newfoundland in 1965 proved that Vikings had sailed the Atlantic, settling in Newfoundland in around AD 1000, meaning that other, similar voyages could well have been made earlier.
possibility does not mean occurence.
quote:I look at claims of Viking landings in the "New World" in pre-columbian times, with as much critical eye, as I do with the quite possible pre-columbian African landings in the "New World". Have biological remains of Vikings been positively and irrefutably identified and traced back to pre-columbian times? What are the nature of these settlements such that, it cannot be explained in any other way, but only by the presence of accidental European sea travellers? How did the native Americans deal with these foreigners? Did the Vikings make it back, and were they organized enough to leave details/records of such trips back to Europe?
quote:I know that this is extremely long but in regards to one of the points that you made which was a very good one:
Supercar quote:
"Could the Egyptians have got it from a third party trader, that didn't necessarily come from the "New World"? If so, have those potential parties of 'antiquity' been investigated?"
Yes this is a strong possiblity but what the author was trying to point out if I'm not mistaken is that Central and South America pyramids and some of the religious belief are very similar to each other. The author was stating that Tutankhamun teaching was brought to the Americas and the Mayans taught the teaching of Tutankhamun in the personage of Quetzalcoatl.[quote]
What Tutankhamon teachings?Tutankamon did not really teach anything out of the ordinary.
[quote]The legend of the feathered snake, together with the super-science which it represented, could have accompanied the transfer of these goods. The undisputable fact remains that the bones of a man, known as the feathered snake to his people, portrayed as a figurine of a bearded white man, who left his knowledge in the form of living miracles encoded into his artefacts, have been found in Mexico 2,000 years after the feathered snake, Tutankhamun, walked the banks of the Nile.
This is an entertaining claim, but where is the vidence. And since when was Tutankhamon a bearded white man?
quote: The man in the tomb in Mexico was the feathered snake; it was not just a tale, not just a story that had crossed an ocean. Theses super-gods taught the same things at different times."
Evidence please.
"In Egypt the snake and the vulture (feathers) were marks of royalty, representing the divine blood of kings. But only one king, in Egypt, carried both the snake and feathers on his forehead. This was the boy-king Tutankhamun, who, like Lord Pacal, took to the throne at the age of nine...
All Pharaohs wore the double-crown that meant just that. Tut's crown was just another variation of the same theme.
quote:Compare the decoded picture of Lord Pacal (plate 16a) as a young boy wearing the feathered hat of Quetzalcoatl with the representation of Tutankhamun, from his tomb in the Valley of the Kings. Both the young king and his bride are touhed by the rays of the sun.
Far fetched comparison. One is a feathered serpent the other are two different animals. And rays around divinity is quite normal
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: But unless you can find skeletal remains from before the slavery period. Then chancves are they didn't just magically appear, and they came or around the time of the colonizers.
"Chances", as you like to put it, doesn't make it absolute. What concrete evidence is there, to suggest that these remains are undeniably those of slaves, other than speculations based on radio-carbon dating and the idea that Spanish colonizers were in the region around the said period, and eventually imported slaves from Africa into the region?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: But unless you can find skeletal remains from before the slavery period. Then chancves are they didn't just magically appear, and they came or around the time of the colonizers.
"Chances", as you like to put it, doesn't make it absolute. What concrete evidence is there, to suggest that these remains are undeniably those of slaves, other than speculations based on radio-carbon dating and the idea that Spanish colonizers were in the region around the said period, and eventually imported slaves from Africa into the region?
Occam's Razor. If no evidence of their presence prior to Colonialists, and We know Africans were there as soon as Colonialists arrived. Then thi higher probability is they came with the Colonialists. A second possibility is that they were freemen from a shipwrecked African corsair. But it would still be around that time. Nothing to do with olmecs or what not. Like I said, I am not against accidental voyagers. But technology transfer and higher knowledge usually doesn't occur on first contact between sailors. Except for knowledge sailors would have of weaponry and ship sailing. Not enough to influence the fromation of major civilizations. Most sailors that would be caught unprepared in a current probably weren't even literate. Other possibilites are revolts on slave ships,like the one that Cinque took over. Many slaves who fought for their freedom may have landed on these shores unknown. Plenty of possibilities WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD.
Posts: 163 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SidiRom: Occam's Razor. If no evidence of their presence prior to Colonialists
...i.e., archeology of skeletal remains claimed to be most likely those of Africans, YET! But you have to bear in mind, that there was a time, when these finds weren't uncovered by those anthropologists.
quote:SidiRom: , and We know Africans were there as soon as Colonialists arrived. Then thi higher probability is they came with the Colonialists.
Well, the 'probability' is there, based on what I mentioned earlier, but it doesn't preclude the probability that the remains aren't those of slaves.
quote:SidiRom: A second possibility is that they were freemen from a shipwrecked African corsair.
What can be deduced from the remains with any degree of certainity, is that Africans were most definitely in the region by the period in question.
quote:SidiRom: But it would still be around that time. Nothing to do with olmecs or what not. Like I said, I am not against accidental voyagers. But technology transfer and higher knowledge usually doesn't occur on first contact between sailors. Except for knowledge sailors would have of weaponry and ship sailing. Not enough to influence the fromation of major civilizations.
Most sailors that would be caught unprepared in a current probably weren't even literate. Other possibilites are revolts on slave ships,like the one that Cinque took over. Many slaves who fought for their freedom may have landed on these shores unknown. Plenty of possibilities WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD
I'm of the opinion, that cultural diffusion is a harder sell, and hence, demands more compelling corroboration. People can make accidental discoveries, just based on curiousity and exploratory expeditions. But this would have to have been planned ahead, meaning that, at least basic necessities such as food and water, would be taken into consideration. Taking some weaponry, might be secondary options. Such expeditions would likely involve at least a few literate individuals, to be accompanied by others. The expeditions may not always necessarily be successful, based on technological level that was available at the time, and the travellers may not be able to return to their point of origin. In such a senario, either the travellers would perish in the midst of the sea journey, or land in the nearest landmark, and make the best of the situation. It is likely though, such planned missions, would be followed by successive missions to rescue the lost expeditionary team, or else, to take up the task from where the lost team left off. In any case, there is likely to be some trail of evidence or substantiation for such planned trips, which would likely be sponsored or authorized by a governing body. Given the ancients, it isn't out of question that unofficial sailors, both literate and illiterate, could accidentally wind up somewhere, and unable to return.
Writing and other innovations usually start with few individuals, and based on necessity, the practice gradually spreads to the greater community. So a few individual, or even one person's idea, can have significant impact on the larger community. So for me, that isn't an issue, but the providing well thought out details, even if on a bit by bit basis, such that when tested against other pieces of information, will make a compelling case.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
supercar quote: ____________________________________________________________________ What Mr. Winters fails to recognize, is that had he simply called Blacks natives of regions outside Africa as "Blacks", not Africans, he wouldn't be running into the kinds of questioning he has thus far been receiving. But as we can see, Mr. Winters seems to be equating "Blacks" with Africans, and hence, his reference to "African skeletons" among the Olmecs. This issue has nothing to do with "Blacks" creating civilizations outside Africa, but discerning whom you can call "African" and whom it doesn't make sense to, unless members of the said "Non-African" Blacks so choose to do so...in which case, that would be the subjective choice of the said individuals. However, "objectively" Blacks natives anywhere cannot simply be called Africans if not for geographical, political and cultural reasons, but for biological reasons. You simply cannot use "Africans" interchangeably with "Blacks" just about anywhere [outside Africa] there are native Black folks for obvious reasons. I suspect that this is what drives Mr. Winters to push for "recent" African links. _____________________________________________________________________
Here you are wrong. I am a Black American. As a group we identify ourselves as African American. If we can call ourselves African American, and be considered Black, there is nothing wrong with considering the Olmecs, who were Blacks African because they originally came from Africa and were not native to America. Moreover, the Olmec name for themselves: Xi, means ‘black’.
The original Olmec lived in the Sahara-Sahel region. As the Sahara became more arid they were forced to seek new homes. Around this time Tichitt was heavily populated so the Proto-Olmecs probably were forced to seek homes further West.
At this time the Niger extended into the Sahara, and emptied in the Atlantic. Lakes and rivers dotted Middle Africa 4000 years ago. The rock art makes it clear the people living in the Sahara had extensive knowledge of navigation and boat building.
The Proto-Olmec could not settle along the Niger river, because it was heavily forested and offered any colonist in the area the possibility of dying due to sleeping sickness. As a result they probably moved westward until they entered the Atlantic. By avoiding heavily forested areas that were centers of diseases---allowed the Proto-Olmec or Xi people, to arrive in Mexico free of diseases . This is why these Africans did not spread epidemics, like the Europeanes devastated Native Americans.
Ancient Africans probably navigated their ships by the stars. We know they probably made maps of their voyage to Mexico, because they took back to Africa, maize . Jeffreys presents an abundance of evidence that Africans in West Africa were already being cultivated when the Portuguese arrived in West Africa. His research indicated that cultivation of maize moved from west to east.
The Olmec were predominately farmers, miners and craftsmen. According to Philip J. Arnold III, in Olmec Art and Archaeology in Meso America ,edited by Clark and Pye, it is clear from the archaeological evidence that while the Gulf Olmecs practiced a sedentary maize based society, most of the other people living in Veracruz, like the people in the Tuxtlas, were mobile people who practiced fishing, hunting and collecting as their method of subsistence.
The main group responsible for the production of stela and statues were the Fa. The Fa, often served as Governors, they also officiated at religious ceremonies and were responsible for acculturating the Olmec children to Olmec society.
The Olmec did not need Amerinds to sculpt their monuments. They brought craftsmen with them when they settled Mexico.
To sculpt the monuments the Olmec craftsmen used wooden millets, chisels and a variety of stone tools, stone axes, hammer stones and sandstone saws to flake and grind local basalt. Archaeologists believe the Olmec used many carvable boulders from Tustla foothills to make their stela and statues.
In Saharan Africa greenstones have been found on many habitation sites. In Mexico the Olmec continued the practice of working green stone to make tools.
The Olmec also worked metals.Richard A. Diehl, in [ B][I]The Olmecs: Americas First Civilization [/B][I/] wrote that Pierre Agrinnier has found native iron ore deposits, iron ore mirrors. He also found a workshop littered with thousands of broken or partially worked ilmenite and magnelite blocks, chert drills. Other Olmec mining outpost have been found throughout the Olmec area.
The Olmec introduced pyramid building, green stone working, advanced engineering knowledge as illustrated by the aqueducts and isotes (small artificial islands built above the annual flood zones) they built at many Olmec sites. Overtime we see the local Amerindians begin to use Olmec style pottery and green stone celts and tools.
This highlights the commercial and political power the African Olmecs exercised in Mexico. Soon we see many of the earlier Black groups belonging to the Mokaya tradition, begin to adopt Olmec culture. Members of Wiercinski’s SubPacific group characterized by the Las Bolas also became members of the Olmec confederation.
The commercialism, science and technology of the Blacks of Olmecland, has led many researchers to declare the Olmecs as the ‘Mother Culture’ of Mexico. These Black Africans spread Mande civilization throughout Mexico. Since they were from Africa and they were Black , there is nothing wrong with calling these people African because they were not descendants of the original Blacks who settled many parts of the Americas 40,000ybp.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
AL-ISLAAH PUBLICATIONSLotus Word Pro 97 Document HOME
Islam in America Islam in China | Islam in Malaysia | Islam in the USSR | Present situation of Soviet Muslims | Islam in Albania | Islam in Bosnia & Herzegovina | Islam in Africa | Islam in West Africa | Islam in America | Islam in Japan __________________________________________ Islam in the World Islam in America MUSLIMS IN THE AMERICAS BEFORE COLUMBUS by Dr. Youssef Mroueh
Introduction Numerous evidence suggests that Muslims from Spain and West Africa arrived in the Americas at least five centuries before Co1umbus. It is recorded, for example that in the mid-tenth century during the rule of the Umayed Caliph Abdul-Rahman III (929-961), Muslims of African origin sailed westward from the Spanish port of Delba (Palos) into the “Ocean of darkness an fog.” They returned after a long absence with much booty from a “strange and curious land.” It is evident that people of Muslim origin are known to have accompanied Columbus and subsequent Spanish explorers to the New World. The last Muslim stronghold in Spain, Granada, fell to the Christians in 1492 CE, just before the Spanish inquisition was launched. To escape persecution, many non-Christians fled or embraced Catholicism. At least two documents imply the presence of Muslims in Spanish America before 1550 CE. Despite the fact that a decree issued in 1539 CE, by Charles V, King of Spain, forbade the grandsons of Muslims who had been burned at the stake to migrate to the West Indies. This decree was ratified in 1543 CE, and an order for the expulsion of all Muslims from overseas Spanish territories was subsequently published. Many references on the Muslim arrival in the Americas are available. They are summarized in the following notes:
Historic Documents l. A Muslim historian and geographer Abul-Hassan Ali Ibn Al-Hussain Al-Masudi (871 - 957 CE) wrote in his book ‘Muruj Adh-dhahab wa Maadin al-Jawhar’ (The Meadows of Gold and Quarries of Jewels) that during the rule of the Muslim Caliph of Spain Abdullah Ibn Muhammad (888 - 912 CE), a Muslim navigator Khashkhash Ibn Saeed Ibn Aswad of Cordoba, Spain sailed from Delba (Palos) in 889 CE, crossed the Atlantic, reached an unknown territory (Ard Majhoola) and returned with fabulous treasures. In Al-Masudi's map of the world there is a large area in the ocean of darkness and fog (the Atlantic ocean) which he referred to as the unknown territory (the Americas). 2. A Muslim historian Abu Bakr Ibn Umar Al-Gutiyya narrated that during the reign of the Muslim Caliph of Spain, Hisham II (976 -1009 CE), another Muslim navigator Ibn Farrukh of Granada sailed from Kadesh (February 999 CE) into the Atlantic, landed in Gando (Great Canary Islands) visiting King Guanariga, and continued westward where he saw and named two islands, Capraria and Pluitana. He arrived back in Spain in May 999 CE. 3. Columbus sailed from Palos (Delba), Spain. He was bound for Gomera (Canary Islands) - Gomera is an Arabic word meaning ‘small firebrand’ - there he fell in love with Beatriz Bobadilla, daughter of the first captain General of the island (the family name Bobadilla is derived from the Arab Islamic name Abouabdilla). Nevertheless, the Bobadilla clan was not easy to ignore. Another Bobadilla (Francisco), later as the royal commissioner, put Columbus in chains and transferred him from Santo Domingo back to Spain (November 1500 CE). The Bobadilla family was related to Abbadid dynasty of Seville (1031 -1091 CE). On October 12, 1492 CE, Columbus landed on a little island in the Bahamas that was called Guanahani by the natives. Renamed San Salvador by Columbus, Guanahani is derived from Mandinka and modified Arabic words. Guana (Ikhwana) means ‘brothers’ and Hani is an Arabic name. Therefore the original name of the island was ‘Hani Brothers.’
Ferdinand Columbus, the son of Christopher, wrote about the blacks seen by his father in Honduras: “The people who live farther east of Pointe Cavinas, as far as Cape Gracios a Dios, are almost black in color.” At the same time in this very same region, lived a tribe of Muslim natives known as Almamy. In Mandinka and Arabic languages Almamy was the designation of “Al-Imam” or “Al-Imamu,” the person who leads the Prayer, or in some cases, the chief of the community, and/or a member of the Imami Muslim community. 4. A renowned American historian and linguist Leo Weiner of Harvard University, in his book Africa and The Discovery of America (1920) wrote that Columbus was well aware of the Mandinka presence in the New World and that the West African Muslims had spread throughout the Caribbean, Central, South and North American territories, including Canada, where they were trading and intermarrying with the Iroquois and Algonquin Indians. Geographic Explorations 1. The famous Muslim geographer and cartographer Al-Sharif Al-Idrisi (1099 - 1166 CE) wrote in his famous book ‘Nuzhat al-Mushtaq fi-Ikhtiraq al-Afaq (Excursion of the longing in crossing horizons) that a group of seafarers (from North Africa) sailed into the sea of darkness and fog (the Atlantic ocean) from Lisbon (Portugal), in order to discover what was in it and what extent were its limits. They finally reached an island that had people and cultivation....on the fourth day, a translator spoke to them in the Arabic language. 2. The Muslim reference books mentioned a well-documented description of a journey across the sea of fog and darkness by Shaikh Zayn-eddine Ali ben Fadhel Al-Mazandarani. His journey started from Tarfay (south Morocco) during the reign of the King Abu-Yacoub Sidi Youssef (1286 - 1307 CE) sixth of the Marinid dynasty, to Green Island in the Caribbean sea in 1291 CE (690 AH). The details of his ocean journey are mentioned in Islamic references, and many Muslim scholars are aware of this recorded historical event. 3. The Muslim historian Chihab Addine Abul-Abbas Ahmad ben Fadhl Al-Umari (1300 - 1384 CE, 700 - 786 AH) described in detail the geographical explorations beyond the sea of fog and darkness of Male’s sultans in his famous book ‘Masaalik al-absaar fi Mamaalik al-amsaar (The Pathways of Sights in The Provinces of Kingdoms). 4. Sultan Mansa Kankan Musa (1312 - 1337 CE) was the world renowned Mandinka monarch of the West African Islamic empire of Mali. While traveling to Makkah on his famous Hajj in 1324 CE, he informed the scholars of the Mamluk Bahri Sultan court (an-Nasir-eddin Muhammad III, 1309 - 1340 CE) in Cairo that his brother, Sultan Abu Bakari I (1285 - 1312 CE) had undertaken two expeditions into the Atlantic ocean. When the sultan did not return to Timbuktu from the second voyage of 1311 CE, Mansa Musa became sultan of the empire. 5.Columbus and early Spanish and Portuguese explorers were able to voyage across the Atlantic (a distance of 24,000 Kilometers) thanks to Muslim geographical and navigational information, in particular maps made by Muslim traders, including Al-Masudi (871 - 957 CE) in his book ‘Akhbar Az-Zaman’ (History of The World) which is based on material gathered in Africa and Asia. As a matter of fact, Columbus had two captains of Muslim origin during his first transatlantic voyage: Martin Alonso Pinzon was the captain of the Pinta, and his brother Vicente Yanex Pinzon was the captain of the Nina. They were wealthy, expert ship outfitters who helped organize the Columbus expedition and repaired the flagship Santa Maria. They did this at their own expense for both commercial and political reasons. The Pinzon family was related to Abuzayan Muhammad III (1362 - 66 CE), the Moroccan sultan of the Marinid dynasty (1196 - 1465 CE).
Arabic (Islamic) Inscriptions l. Anthropologists have proven that the Mandinkas under Mansa Musa's instructions explored many parts of North America via the Mississippi and other rivers systems. At Four Corners, Arizona, writings show that they even brought elephants from Africa to the area. 2. Columbus admitted in his papers that on Monday, October 21, 1492 CE while his ship was sailing near Gibara on the north-east coast of Cuba, he saw a mosque on the top of a beautiful mountain. The ruins of mosques and minarets with inscriptions of Qur'anic verses have been discovered in Cuba, Mexico, Texas and Nevada. 3. During his second voyage, Columbus was told by the Indians of Espanola (Haiti), that Black people had been to the island before his arrival. For proof they presented Columbus with the spears of these African Muslims. These weapons were tipped with a yellow metal that the Indians called Guanine, a word of West African derivation meaning ‘gold alloy.’ Oddly enough, it is related to the Arabic world ‘Ghinaa’ which means ‘Wealth.’ Columbus brought some Guanines back to Spain and had them tested. He learned that the metal was 18 parts gold (56.25 percent), six parts silver (18.75 percent and eight parts copper (25 percent), the same ratio as the metal produced in African metal shops of Guinea. 4. In 1498 CE, on his third voyage to the New World, Columbus landed in Trinidad. Later, he sighted the South American continent, where some of his crew went ashore and found natives using colorful handkerchiefs of symmetrically woven cotton. Columbus noticed the these handkerchiefs resembled the head dresses and loincloths of Guinea in their colors, style and function. He referred to them as Almayzars. Almayzar is an Arabic word for ‘wrapper,’ ‘cover,’ ‘apron’ and or ‘skirting,’ which was the cloth the Moors (Spanish or North African Muslims) imported from West Africa (Guinea) into Morocco, Spain and Portugal. During this voyage, Columbus was surprised that the married women wore cotton panties (bragas) and he wondered where these natives learned their modesty. Hernando Cortez, Spanish conqueror, described the dress of the Indian women as long veils and the dress of Indian men as ‘breechcloth painted in the style of Moorish draperies.’ Ferdinand Columbus called the native cotton garments ‘breechclothes of the same design and cloth as the shawls worn by the Moorish women of Granada.’ Even the similarity of the children's hammocks to those found in North Africa was uncanny. 5. Dr. Barry Fell (Harvard University) introduced in his book Saga America - 1980 solid scientific evidence supporting the arrival, centuries before Columbus, of Muslims from North and West Africa. Dr. Fell discovered the existence of Muslim schools at Valley of Fire, Allan Springs, Logomarsino, Keyhole Canyon, Washoe and Hickison Summit Pass (Nevada), Mesa Verde (Colorado), Mimbres Valley (New Mexico) and Tipper Canoe (Indiana) dating back to 700-800 CE. Engraved on rocks in the old western US, he found texts, diagrams and charts representing the last surviving fragments of what was once a system of schools - at both an elementary and higher levels. The language of instruction was North African Arabic written with old Kufic Arabic script. The subjects of instruction included writing, reading, arithmetic, religion, history, geography, mathematics, astronomy and sea navigation. The descendants of the Muslim visitors of North America are members of the present Iroquois, Algonquin, Anasazi, Hohokam and Olmec native people. 6. There are 565 names of places (villages, towns, cities, mountains, lakes, rivers, etc.) in USA (484) and Canada (81) which are derived from Islamic and Arabic roots. These places were originally named by the natives in pre-Columbian period. Some of these names carried holy meanings such as: Mecca (Indiana) - 720 inhabitants, Makkah Indian tribe (Washington), Medina (Idaho) - 2100, Medina (NY) - 8500, Medina and Hazen (North Dakota) - 1100 and 5000, respectively, Medina (Ohio) - 12,000, Medina (Tennessee) - 1100, Medina (Texas) - 26,000, Medina (Ontario) -1200, Mahomet (Illinois) - 3200, Mona (Utah) - 1100, Arva (Ontario) - 700, and many others. A careful study of the names of the native Indian tribes revealed that many names are derived from Arab and Islamic roots and origins, i.e. Anasazi, Apache, Arawak, Arikana, Chavin Cherokee, Cree, Hohokam, Hupa, Hopi, Makkah, Mahigan, Mohawk, Nazca, Zulu, Zuni, etc.
Dr. Youssef Mroueh Courtesy BIC, UK and MSANews/MSANet, USA. Explanatory text in [...] and the web version by Dr. A. Zahoor.
Posts: 104 | From: santa barbara, california usa | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Again you show your ignorance. Mosquitos transmit the disease from one human host to another. Before African arrivals we did not have human hosts carrying the disease.
FACT is Before African arrivals we did not have Human Beings PERIOD, do not forget that. Proving if the Afrikan was here first of COURSE the Afrikan will be the First to host a disease that is transmittable to humans because no other humans were here except the Afrikan to transmit the disease to. Please include the fact that Before Afrikan arrivals no human beings were speaking a language, walking upright, exhibiting HIGH INTELLIGENCE and BUILDING Civilizations so don’t forget that either. So being the first carry’s its ups and downs.
Sidirom wrote:
quote: You must have forgotten a full coastal route. What a moron. I have already shown plenty of other currents have taken accidental travelers to and from the Americans. This is not enough to constitute a population mifration. Nice try.
FACT NO. 2 THE CANARY CURRENTS TRAVEL FROM WEST AFRIKA TO SOUTH AMERICA.
Ocean Currents are what Ocean Navigators use to travel Ocean routes! When you begin to understand what I’m telling then you will realize the ignorance that you are now proving. Intelligent people understand that someone cannot just build a boat with a sail and decide to travel a Ocean route. Let me tell Sidirom a little secret EVEN TODAY SAILORS CAN’T PREDICT the Oceanic Currents, U.S military sailors who are using Satellite Navigation systems sometimes get lost at sea so if you think that some one living over 3500 years ago could sail from Australia challenging the NUMEROUS and ever changing Ocean Currents and successfully sail from Australia to South America using simple Navigation instruments if any, then I have a bridge in BROOKLYN to sell Sidirom with a line of cars included.
The CANARY CURRENTS are a Direct class 1 Current leading from West Afrika to South America so someone in West Afrika can build a boat put up a sail and use the CANARY CURRENTS to take them to South America, and they will reach within 1-2 weeks. Australians don’t have that luxury. Some Eurocentric’s say things that shows such high IGNORANCE.
Sidirom wrote:
quote: And yet they didn't use it because they weren't aware of America. Neither did the Euproeans. Such is life. No current to bring accidental travelers back to tell the tale.
Typical Eurocentric because Europeans didn’t know about America, Sidirom believes Afrikans didn’t know about it also L L. Sidirom believes Knowledge began Europeans L L, or Europeans are the smartest people in the world so if they don’t know then no one cannot possibly know L L. Racism is the ultimate tool to dumb down the masses. I told Sidirom to research what are Oceanic Currents and it is obvious that Sidirom didn’t listen.
South Equatorial Currents:
These buoys travel thousands of km (south-) westward in the South Equatorial Current (SEC) and end up in the North Brazil Current. Buoy 00001611 was initially in the eastward North Equatorial Current, then the Guinea Current, before it ended up in the SEC.
Equatorial Currents lead the bouys to the Guinea Current. From West Afrika to Brazil, from Brazil to West Afrika these buoys proved it.
Sidirom Wrote:
quote: A coastal route around the North Pacific could have led early explorers to lands later submerged when melting glaciers raised sea levels. The possibility of an Ice Age migration directly across the Pacific is widely discounted, but Polynesians certainly had that capability by 500 A.D., when Hawaii and Easter Island were inhabited
This is beyond Speculation, this is just plain wishful thinking to claim that people traveling a coastal route ended up migrating to South America and building similar statues that are located in West Afrika while ignoring the FACT that west Afrika is the easiest route to get to and from South America, is really funny if you think about but then again let me allow Sidirom to answer this form of Wishful thinking.
Sidirom wrote:
quote: Still wishful thinking. possibility does not mean occurence.
Sidirom wrote:
quote:"Early people might have moved south from the Bering Strait by following a chain of small ice-free areas that existed along the outer Pacific coast," Knut Fladmark, a professor of archaeology at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, told me by e-mail. "Many of those areas would now be underwater.
I wonder what Sidirom would do if Knut Fladmark (LOL the names speaks volumes) told him the world was FLAT? Early people might NOT have moved south from the Bering Straight by NOT following a imaginable ice-free area that didn’t have to exist along the outer Pacific coast,” just to prove Knut Fladmark might be Knut is nuts and off the mark Fladmark. Eurocentrics will say just about anything to try to cover up the Truth. Professor Knut Fladmark needs to start issuing refunds to those students right now because this idea is really illogical and beyond speculative. Sidirom said it well before so lets hear it again.
Sidirom speaks again:
quote: Still wishful thinking. possibility does not mean occurence.
Here you are wrong. I am a Black American. As a group we identify ourselves as African American. If we can call ourselves African American, and be considered Black, there is nothing wrong with considering the Olmecs, who were Blacks
Well, if Black Americans, who have relatively recent ancestry [and even if they didn't] call themselves Africans, I see nothing wrong with it, as it is their choice to make. The same applies to other Black natives elsewhere outside Africa.
quote: Clyde Winters: The Proto-Olmec could not settle along the Niger river, because it was heavily forested and offered any colonist in the area the possibility of dying due to sleeping sickness.
…while other Africans saw fit to settle the region.
quote: Clyde Winters: As a result they probably moved westward until they entered the Atlantic. By avoiding heavily forested areas that were centers of diseases---allowed the Proto-Olmec or Xi people, to arrive in Mexico free of diseases . This is why these Africans did not spread epidemics, like the Europeanes devastated Native Americans.
…like Nomads?
quote: Clyde Winters: Ancient Africans probably navigated their ships by the stars. We know they probably made maps of their voyage to Mexico, because they took back to Africa, maize . Jeffreys presents an abundance of evidence that Africans in West Africa were already being cultivated when the Portuguese arrived in West Africa. His research indicated that cultivation of maize moved from west to east.
The Olmec were predominately farmers, miners and craftsmen. According to Philip J. Arnold III, in Olmec Art and Archaeology in Meso America ,edited by Clark and Pye, it is clear from the archaeological evidence that while the Gulf Olmecs practiced a sedentary maize based society, most of the other people living in Veracruz, like the people in the Tuxtlas, were mobile people who practiced fishing, hunting and collecting as their method of subsistence.
Not that maize thing, as we had heard about millets in India…but this time, American species in Africa? When did American maize first arrive in west Africa, according to your “sources”?
quote: Clyde Winters: The main group responsible for the production of stela and statues were the Fa. The Fa, often served as Governors, they also officiated at religious ceremonies and were responsible for acculturating the Olmec children to Olmec society.
The Olmec did not need Amerinds to sculpt their monuments. They brought craftsmen with them when they settled Mexico.
To sculpt the monuments the Olmec craftsmen used wooden millets, chisels and a variety of stone tools, stone axes, hammer stones and sandstone saws to flake and grind local basalt. Archaeologists believe the Olmec used many carvable boulders from Tustla foothills to make their stela and statues.
In Saharan Africa greenstones have been found on many habitation sites. In Mexico the Olmec continued the practice of working green stone to make tools.
I believe it was already brought to your attention in another discussion, that the examples you showed of colossal head structures, date later than the Olmec sculptures, not to mention marked distinctions in details. Africans and ancient Americans working with green stones in itself doesn’t suggest any direct links, unless you can demonstrate links in the way these tools were modified, and that these ‘unique or specific’ techniques in Africa precede such practices in America, such that no other explanation can be provided for their presence in Ancient America; or else, there isn’t much material here for cultural diffusion.
quote: Clyde Winters: The commercialism, science and technology of the Blacks of Olmecland, has led many researchers to declare the Olmecs as the ‘Mother Culture’ of Mexico. These Black Africans spread Mande civilization throughout Mexico. Since they were from Africa and they were Black , there is nothing wrong with calling these people African because they were not descendants of the original Blacks who settled many parts of the Americas 40,000ybp.
Something interesting though, these folks supposedly spread “Mande” civilization, but there are “Mande” speaking folks with their various cultures in west Africa. I could have sworn that you mentioned that the proto-Olmecs couldn’t settle along the Niger River, because of heavy forest and disease like sleeping sickness. So these proto-Olmecs just decided not to follow suite as their “Mande” colleagues. Did they consider themselves too smart to mix with other Mande speakers in the region, or were they considered ‘outcasts’ by other Mande speakers? What common cultural traits do the Olmec “Mande civilization” have with its African “Mande” counterparts, that can be deemed as undeniable links between them?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
supercar quote: _________________________________________________________________ quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clyde Winters: The Proto-Olmec could not settle along the Niger river, because it was heavily forested and offered any colonist in the area the possibility of dying due to sleeping sickness. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
…while other Africans saw fit to settle the region. _________________________________________________________________
The McIntoshes have made it clear that the Niger Delta was settled until after 250 BC because of its forestation.
I don't think they felt they were to good to settle among the other mande in Tichitt, they just moved further West because of the population pressure there did not allow them enough room to settle.
Given the numerous Olmec mining sites in MesoAmerica, large numbers of Proto-Olmec may have setlled Mexico with their families to participate in the economic boom taking place in MesoAmerica resulting from the discovery of new sources of green stone and other items important in the Saharan trade system 3500 years ago.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Winters writes: I am a Black American. As a group we identify ourselves as African American. If we can call ourselves African American, and be considered Black, there is nothing wrong with considering the Olmecs, who were Blacks African because they originally came from Africa and were not native to America. Moreover, the Olmec name for themselves: Xi, means ‘black’.
If they came to America directly from Africa during historical times you are correct and the Olmec were Black Africans.
If they came from the Pacific and are descendant from the Paleo-Indians then you are incorrect, and they were Black Paleo-Indians - but not African.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
Your maps are quite interesting. They show places where Europeans sighted Africans/Black people. Let's not forget the significant influence of African genes among Brazilian groups.
When the Europeans came to the Americas they discovered Africans were already well established in Latin America ( Quatrefages, 1889; Rafinesque, 1836; Wiener, 1920-1922; Winters, 1984c, 1984d; Wuthenau, 1980) . On Columbus' third voyage he noted Blacks sailing in the Caribbean. Other Africans were found in the interior of the Isthmus of Panama. And Bishop Las Casas wrote about an African king residing in the same part of Panama.
A. de Quatrefages (1889), claimed that Africans formerly lived in Florida, the Caribbean, Mexico and Panama he identified the Otomi and Chontal as representatives of these Black people. The American linguist C.S. Rafinesque (1836) was sure that "many nations of Brazil and Guyana are more recent and of African origin" (p.9). He also discovered that an Amerind language called Yarura was an Ashante cognate.
-------------------- C. A. Winters Posts: 13012 | From: Chicago | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
If they came from the Pacific and are descendant from the Paleo-Indians then you are incorrect, and they were Black Paleo-Indians - but not African. ________________________________________________________
I will concede the fact that Wiercinski's determination of Subpacific people, appear to reflect the Las Bolas type. I am therefore coming around to the idea these people were of Pacific origin and may include people who adopted Olmec culture traits.
quote:Originally posted by zulu: It is recorded, for example that in the mid-tenth century during the rule of the Umayed Caliph Abdul-Rahman III (929-961), Muslims of African origin sailed westward from the Spanish port of Delba (Palos) into the “Ocean of darkness an fog.” They returned after a long absence with much booty from a “strange and curious land.”
Which could have been any of a bunch of islands. Maybe even Brittain.
But the foremost Arab geographer of the Middle Ages, al-Idrisi, who was born in Morocco in A.D. 1100 and knew the Atlantic better than most, wrote of the "Ocean of Darkness" (the Atlantic Ocean): Nobody knows what exists beyond that sea, nobody has been able to learn anything sure on account of the difficulties that prevent navigation, because of the depth of darkness, the height of the waves, the frequency of storms, the multiplicity of monstrous animals and the violence of the winds. Yet there are a number of islands in this ocean, either inhabited or uninhabited, but no navigator dares to cross it nor to gain the high seas. They limit themselves to hugging the coast, without losing sight of the shore. (al-Idrisi1968: 197).
quote: It is evident that people of Muslim origin are known to have accompanied Columbus and subsequent Spanish explorers to the New World.
Yet none of them knew of the existence of America.
l. A Muslim historian and geographer Abul-Hassan Ali Ibn Al-Hussain Al-Masudi (871 - 957 CE) wrote in his book ‘Muruj Adh-dhahab wa Maadin al-Jawhar’ (The Meadows of Gold and Quarries of Jewels) that during the rule of the Muslim Caliph of Spain Abdullah Ibn Muhammad (888 - 912 CE), a Muslim navigator Khashkhash Ibn Saeed Ibn Aswad of Cordoba, Spain sailed from Delba (Palos) in 889 CE, crossed the Atlantic, reached an unknown territory (Ard Majhoola) and returned with fabulous treasures. In Al-Masudi's map of the world there is a large area in the ocean of darkness and fog (the Atlantic ocean) which he referred to as the unknown territory (the Americas).[/quote] Funny how this territory does not show up in the Arab maps.
Feel free to show the maps.
quote:2. A Muslim historian Abu Bakr Ibn Umar Al-Gutiyya narrated that during the reign of the Muslim Caliph of Spain, Hisham II (976 -1009 CE), another Muslim navigator Ibn Farrukh of Granada sailed from Kadesh (February 999 CE) into the Atlantic, landed in Gando (Great Canary Islands) visiting King Guanariga, and continued westward where he saw and named two islands, Capraria and Pluitana. He arrived back in Spain in May 999 CE.
Again, where is the evidence that Capracia and Pluitana are the Americas. In fact there is evidence that Capracia and Pluitana are part of the six island chain also mentioned by Ptolemy. "The Madeiran Archipelago consists of five islands disposed in a scalene triangle, whose points are Porto Santo (23 miles, north-east), Madeira (west), and the three Desertas (11 miles, south-east). The Great and Little Piton of the Selvagens, or Salvages (100 miles, south), though belonging to Portugal and to the district of Funchal, are geographically included in the Canarian group. Thus, probably, we may explain the 'Aprositos,' or Inaccessible Island, which Ptolemy Footnote: The great Alexandrian is here (iv. 6, §§ 33-4) sadly out of his reckoning. He places the group of six islands adjacent to Libya many degrees too far south (N. lat. 10°-16°), and assigns one meridian (0° 0' 0") to Aprositos, Pluitana , Caspeiria (Capraria, Lanzarote), and another and the same (1° 0' 0") to Pintouaria (Nivaria, Tenerife), Hera (Junonia, Gomera,), and Canaria.
quote:On October 12, 1492 CE, Columbus landed on a little island in the Bahamas that was called Guanahani by the natives. Renamed San Salvador by Columbus, Guanahani is derived from Mandinka and modified Arabic words. Guana (Ikhwana) means ‘brothers’ and Hani is an Arabic name. Therefore the original name of the island was ‘Hani Brothers.’
Guanahani mean welcom in Arawak
quote:Ferdinand Columbus, the son of Christopher, wrote about the blacks seen by his father in Honduras: “The people who live farther east of Pointe Cavinas, as far as Cape Gracios a Dios, are almost black in color.” At the same time in this very same region, lived a tribe of Muslim natives known as Almamy. In Mandinka and Arabic languages Almamy was the designation of “Al-Imam” or “Al-Imamu,” the person who leads the Prayer, or in some cases, the chief of the community, and/or a member of the Imami Muslim community.
Feel free to quote your reference. No record of any Almamy people.
quote:4. A renowned American historian and linguist Leo Weiner of Harvard University, in his book Africa and The Discovery of America (1920) wrote that Columbus was well aware of the Mandinka presence in the New World and that the West African Muslims had spread throughout the Caribbean, Central, South and North American territories, including Canada, where they were trading and intermarrying with the Iroquois and Algonquin Indians.
LOL. Wiener, Rafinesque, Wierzinski. Al discredited claims.
quote:1. The famous Muslim geographer and cartographer Al-Sharif Al-Idrisi (1099 - 1166 CE) wrote in his famous book ‘Nuzhat al-Mushtaq fi-Ikhtiraq al-Afaq (Excursion of the longing in crossing horizons) that a group of seafarers (from North Africa) sailed into the sea of darkness and fog (the Atlantic ocean) from Lisbon (Portugal), in order to discover what was in it and what extent were its limits. They finally reached an island that had people and cultivation....on the fourth day, a translator spoke to them in the Arabic language.
Yet no evidence of this claims or mention of this land in Al Idrisi's maps (shown above)
quote:2. The Muslim reference books mentioned a well-documented description of a journey across the sea of fog and darkness by Shaikh Zayn-eddine Ali ben Fadhel Al-Mazandarani. His journey started from Tarfay (south Morocco) during the reign of the King Abu-Yacoub Sidi Youssef (1286 - 1307 CE) sixth of the Marinid dynasty, to Green Island in the Caribbean sea in 1291 CE (690 AH). The details of his ocean journey are mentioned in Islamic references, and many Muslim scholars are aware of this recorded historical event.
Then you can reference these claims. Posts like these are entertaining because they make a lot of claims but give no references to be verified.
quote:3. The Muslim historian Chihab Addine Abul-Abbas Ahmad ben Fadhl Al-Umari (1300 - 1384 CE, 700 - 786 AH) described in detail the geographical explorations beyond the sea of fog and darkness of Male’s sultans in his famous book ‘Masaalik al-absaar fi Mamaalik al-amsaar (The Pathways of Sights in The Provinces of Kingdoms). 4. Sultan Mansa Kankan Musa (1312 - 1337 CE) was the world renowned Mandinka monarch of the West African Islamic empire of Mali. While traveling to Makkah on his famous Hajj in 1324 CE, he informed the scholars of the Mamluk Bahri Sultan court (an-Nasir-eddin Muhammad III, 1309 - 1340 CE) in Cairo that his brother, Sultan Abu Bakari I (1285 - 1312 CE) had undertaken two expeditions into the Atlantic ocean. When the sultan did not return to Timbuktu from the second voyage of 1311 CE, Mansa Musa became sultan of the empire.
Again, no evidence, just empty claims
quote:5.Columbus and early Spanish and Portuguese explorers were able to voyage across the Atlantic (a distance of 24,000 Kilometers) thanks to Muslim geographical and navigational information, in particular maps made by Muslim traders, including Al-Masudi (871 - 957 CE) in his book ‘Akhbar Az-Zaman’ (History of The World) which is based on material gathered in Africa and Asia. As a matter of fact, Columbus had two captains of Muslim origin during his first transatlantic voyage: Martin Alonso Pinzon was the captain of the Pinta, and his brother Vicente Yanex Pinzon was the captain of the Nina. They were wealthy, expert ship outfitters who helped organize the Columbus expedition and repaired the flagship Santa Maria. They did this at their own expense for both commercial and political reasons. The Pinzon family was related to Abuzayan Muhammad III (1362 - 66 CE), the Moroccan sultan of the Marinid dynasty (1196 - 1465 CE).
Yet both brothers had no knowledge of the Americas.
quote:Arabic (Islamic) Inscriptions l. Anthropologists have proven that the Mandinkas under Mansa Musa's instructions explored many parts of North America via the Mississippi and other rivers systems. At Four Corners, Arizona, writings show that they even brought elephants from Africa to the area.
Oh yeah elephants as well.
quote:2. Columbus admitted in his papers that on Monday, October 21, 1492 CE while his ship was sailing near Gibara on the north-east coast of Cuba, he saw a mosque on the top of a beautiful mountain. The ruins of mosques and minarets with inscriptions of Qur'anic verses have been discovered in Cuba, Mexico, Texas and Nevada.
More empty claims without evidence.
quote:3. During his second voyage, Columbus was told by the Indians of Espanola (Haiti), that Black people had been to the island before his arrival. For proof they presented Columbus with the spears of these African Muslims. These weapons were tipped with a yellow metal that the Indians called Guanine, a word of West African derivation meaning ‘gold alloy.’ Oddly enough, it is related to the Arabic world ‘Ghinaa’ which means ‘Wealth.’ Columbus brought some Guanines back to Spain and had them tested. He learned that the metal was 18 parts gold (56.25 percent), six parts silver (18.75 percent and eight parts copper (25 percent), the same ratio as the metal produced in African metal shops of Guinea.
More falsehoods.
This was the third not the 2nd voyage. There is NO direct Columbus saying anything about the 3rd Voyage. The only report available is an extract made from Columbus' log made by de las Casas.
This is from a claim of Van Sertima. "Columbus wanted to find out what the Indians of Española had told him, that there had come from the south and the southeast, Negro people, who brought those spear points made of a metal which they call guanin, of which he had sent samples to the king and queen for assay which [sic] was found to have 32 parts- 18 of gold, 6 of silver, and 8 of copper (Thacher 1903-1904: vol. 2, 380)" From BOM: Van Sertima presents the claim of identity between African and New World alloy spears as if it were a continuing paraphrase of the quote from Columbus. In fact, neither Thacher, Las Casas, Columbus nor anyone else says anything about African gold spears, their analysis, or their identity with the gold alloy from the New World.(7) Van Sertima asserts this identity with no evidence whatsoever. This complete lack of evidence disposes of his claim, but we will discuss the matter briefly. Copper/gold and copper/gold/silver alloys are not distinguished from each other and are referred to generically as tumbaga.(8) Guanín is a word in Arawak, the language of the inhabitants of Hispaniola, not Mandingo and was, therefore, not imported. Rivet and Arsandaux (1946: 60 ff.) show that in many Arawakan languages words like guanín or guani and words resembling karakoli, in Carib languages, designate tumbaga alloys. In his discussion of this issue, Van Sertima relies on the Afrocentric hyperdiffusionist Harold Lawrence, not on Columbus and the early chroniclers. Lawrence (1987) claims that "Mandinga traders" from West Africa made "several" voyages to the Americas after 1300 and established colonies in Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Venezuela, and the island of St. Vincent. In any case alloys in Africa were not the same as Columbus' guanín. Lawrence, Van Sertima's source, cites Bosman (1967) for the composition of gold alloy objects (though not spear heads). For comparison, Moche tumbagas are also provided (Lechtman 1988). The composition is given in percentages to facilitate comparison. gold copper silver Columbus-guanin 56% 25% 19% Guinea 50% 25% 25% Guinea 65% 17.2% 17.2% Mochica 31% 60% 10% Moche 68% 13% 19% Moche 67% 11% 22% The proportions of this ternary alloy vary so widely that a particular composition is not an identifying marker.(9) Columbus found natives trading all kinds of objects (not just spear points) made from guanín in the whole region of Central America and Venezuela (Morison 1942: 265, 589). This was to be expected, because copper/gold and copper/silver/gold alloys were first made by the Moche culture of Peru about A.D. 100 (Lechtman, Erlij, and Barry 1982) and eventually diffused through the New World reaching Western Mexico about A.D. 1200 (Hosler 1994: 127). There is no need to posit diffusion of this alloy to the circum-Caribbean region from Africa because gold/copper/silver alloys were being made in neighboring South America 1400 years before Columbus' journey. ******* notes (5) Morison (1963: 259) says that Bartolomé de Las Casas made an abstract of the journal of the Third Voyage. This manuscript was first printed in full by De Lolis in Raccolta I ii 1-25 and "so far as I can ascertain, the only English translation published is an unreliable one in Thacher... [This is the source used by Van Sertima]." An abstract of a scribe's report of statements from Christopher Columbus is not quite the equivalent of a "controlled archaeological dig" in evaluating an artifact. (6) Thacher is not quoted correctly- it should read- "... he thought to investigate the report of the Indians of this Española who said that there had come to Española from the south and south-east, a black people, who have the tops of their spears made of a metal which they call 'guanin' of which he had sent samples to the Sovereigns to have them assayed, when it was found that of 32 parts, 18 were of gold, 6 of silver, and 8 of copper." It is also problematic that Thacher was used (presumably because that is what Wiener used) when a better and more accessible translation (Morison 1963: 263) was available. (7) Why Africans would limit themselves to bring soft gold tipped spears to the New World is beyond us. Africans smelted iron and steel by 600 B.C. in Tanzania (Schmidt and Childs 1995; Schmidt 1996), and iron tools reached West Africa 2000 years ago, fueling the Bantu explosion that populated Central Africa (Diamond 1994). Columbus and his editor, Bartolomé de Las Casas, were convinced that Africans had not come to the Americas because the two continents were too distant from each other (Morison 1963: 271; Thacher 1903 04: vol. 2, 392-393). (8) Tumbaga is a Sanskrit loan word for copper which came to the New World via Tagalog (Philippines) and Spanish, and in turn, copper/gold alloys taken to the Far East by the Spanish were called tumbaga (Blust 1992). (9) Rivet and Arsandaux (1946: 48-59) found tumbaga objects with a gold content ranging from 11% to 81% and copper ranging from 18% to 87%> ****** References Bosman, W. 1967 [1705]. A New and Accurate Description of the Coast of Guinea. London: Frank Cass & Co. Blust, R. 1992. "Tumbaga in Southeast Asia and South America," Anthropos 87: 443-457. Diamond, J. 1994. "How Africa Became Black," Discover (February): 72-81. Hosler, D. 1994. The Sounds and Colors of Power. The Sacred Metallurgical Technology of Ancient West Mexico. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lawrence, H. 1987. "Mandinga Voyages Across the Atlantic," in African Presence in Early America. edited by I. Van Sertima. 55-81. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Lechtman, H. 1988. "Tradition and Styles in Central Andean Metalworking," In The Beginning of the Use of Metals and Alloys, ed. R. Maddin. 344-378. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lechtman, H., A. Erlij, and E. J. Barry. 1982. "New Perspectives on Moche Metallurgy: Techniques of Gilding Copper at Loma Negra, Northern Peru." Antiquity. 47: 3-30 Morison, S.E. 1942. Admiral of the Open Sea. A Life of Christopher Columbus. Boston: Little Brown. Morison, S.E.trans. and ed. 1963. Journals and Other Documents on the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus New York:The Heritage Press. Rivet, P. and H. Arsandaux. 1946. La Métallurgie en Amérique Précolombienne. Paris: Institut d'Ethnologie, Musée de l'Homme. Schmidt, P. R., ed. 1996. The Culture and Technology of African Iron Production. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Schmidt, P. R. and S. T. Childs. 1995. "Ancient African Iron Production," American Scientist 83: 524-533. Thacher, J.B. 1903-1904. Christopher Columbus. His Life, His Works, His Remains. NY: G.P. Putnam's Sons. Van Sertima, I.1995. African Presence in Early America. in Race, Discourse, and the Origin of the Americas: A New World View. edited by V. L. Hyatt and R. Nettleford. 66 -----1998. Early America Revisited. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
quote:4. In 1498 CE, on his third voyage to the New World, Columbus landed in Trinidad. Later, he sighted the South American continent, where some of his crew went ashore and found natives using colorful handkerchiefs of symmetrically woven cotton. Columbus noticed the these handkerchiefs resembled the head dresses and loincloths of Guinea in their colors, style and function. He referred to them as Almayzars. Almayzar is an Arabic word for ‘wrapper,’ ‘cover,’ ‘apron’ and or ‘skirting,’ which was the cloth the Moors (Spanish or North African Muslims) imported from West Africa (Guinea) into Morocco, Spain and Portugal. During this voyage, Columbus was surprised that the married women wore cotton panties (bragas) and he wondered where these natives learned their modesty. Hernando Cortez, Spanish conqueror, described the dress of the Indian women as long veils and the dress of Indian men as ‘breechcloth painted in the style of Moorish draperies.’ Ferdinand Columbus called the native cotton garments ‘breechclothes of the same design and cloth as the shawls worn by the Moorish women of Granada.’ Even the similarity of the children's hammocks to those found in North Africa was uncanny.
More entertaining hearsay claims. Please, please provide some sources for these claims.
quote:5. Dr. Barry Fell (Harvard University) introduced in his book Saga America - 1980 solid scientific evidence supporting the arrival, centuries before Columbus, of Muslims from North and West Africa. Dr. Fell discovered the existence of Muslim schools at Valley of Fire, Allan Springs, Logomarsino, Keyhole Canyon, Washoe and Hickison Summit Pass (Nevada), Mesa Verde (Colorado), Mimbres Valley (New Mexico) and Tipper Canoe (Indiana) dating back to 700-800 CE. Engraved on rocks in the old western US, he found texts, diagrams and charts representing the last surviving fragments of what was once a system of schools - at both an elementary and higher levels. The language of instruction was North African Arabic written with old Kufic Arabic script. The subjects of instruction included writing, reading, arithmetic, religion, history, geography, mathematics, astronomy and sea navigation. The descendants of the Muslim visitors of North America are members of the present Iroquois, Algonquin, Anasazi, Hohokam and Olmec native people.
You do know Fell's specialty was not linguistics by Ichtyiology right? He was an expert in fishes. No linguist has taken his hobby claims seriously. There is a whol band of diffusionists that make claims like this, but none presents solid evidence.
quote:6. There are 565 names of places (villages, towns, cities, mountains, lakes, rivers, etc.) in USA (484) and Canada (81) which are derived from Islamic and Arabic roots. These places were originally named by the natives in pre-Columbian period. Some of these names carried holy meanings such as: Mecca (Indiana) - 720 inhabitants, Makkah Indian tribe (Washington), Medina (Idaho) - 2100, Medina (NY) - 8500, Medina and Hazen (North Dakota) - 1100 and 5000, respectively, Medina (Ohio) - 12,000, Medina (Tennessee) - 1100, Medina (Texas) - 26,000, Medina (Ontario) -1200, Mahomet (Illinois) - 3200, Mona (Utah) - 1100, Arva (Ontario) - 700, and many others. A careful study of the names of the native Indian tribes revealed that many names are derived from Arab and Islamic roots and origins, i.e. Anasazi, Apache, Arawak, Arikana, Chavin Cherokee, Cree, Hohokam, Hupa, Hopi, Makkah, Mahigan, Mohawk, Nazca, Zulu, Zuni, etc.
This is too comedic to even address. Posts: 36 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hotep2u: FACT is Before African arrivals we did not have Human Beings PERIOD
Strawman alert.
quote:Proving if the Afrikan was here first of COURSE the Afrikan will be the First to host a disease that is transmittable to humans because no other humans were here except the Afrikan to transmit the disease to.
And because of the fact Africans were exposed to Malaria and Yellow Fever and had higher resistance to it (A resistance to Malaria in the form of Sickle cell anemia passed on to Southern Europe through admixture), a disease that has been passed on to all populations where they have admixed, a disease that did not exist in latin America, even though sickle cell disease is ancient in Africa. Thus pointing that that West African migration before was highly unilely.
quote: Please include the fact that Before Afrikan arrivals no human beings were speaking a language, walking upright, exhibiting HIGH INTELLIGENCE and BUILDING Civilizations so don’t forget that either. So being the first carry’s its ups and downs.
Before African arrivals there were no human beings. Another strawman. But once people migrated out, and settled in other parts of the world, we do not call them Africans. If not, I can easily say the Africans in Europe were the conquerors of the Americas.
quote:THE CANARY CURRENTS TRAVEL FROM WEST AFRIKA TO SOUTH AMERICA. Ocean Currents are what Ocean Navigators use to travel Ocean routes! Intelligent people understand that someone cannot just build a boat with a sail and decide to travel a Ocean route. Let me tell Sidirom a little secret EVEN TODAY SAILORS CAN’T PREDICT the Oceanic Currents, U.S military sailors who are using Satellite Navigation systems sometimes get lost at sea so if you think that some one living over 3500 years ago could sail from Australia challenging the NUMEROUS and ever changing Ocean Currents and successfully sail from Australia to South America using simple Navigation instruments if any, then I have a bridge in BROOKLYN to sell Sidirom with a line of cars included.
Another strawman. COastal travel does not need such high levels of navigation. The Paleo-Indians would have hugged the coast in their travels.
quote:The CANARY CURRENTS are a Direct class 1 Current leading from West Afrika to South America so someone in West Afrika can build a boat put up a sail and use the CANARY CURRENTS to take them to South America, and they will reach within 1-2 weeks. Australians don’t have that luxury.
Another falsehood. Many people in the Canary Islands crossed the Atlantic to Cuba, Venezuela and Brazil in small boats, especially in the 1950s to escape poverty, and it took them around 3 to 4 weeks. But there is a key detail. Canarians have no record of traveling to the Americas, yet some Mande on the continent are going to go where the Canarians never went on a current that goes right by their island. Or are you trying to claim the Guinea current is stronger?
On a sad side note: The Canary Current has been a frustration and has caused deaths presently as illegal migrant Africans have had to fight it in their efforts to reach the Canaries and then Europe. They have been sailing in relatively frail hand crafted wooden fishing boats against the current.
quote:Typical Eurocentric because Europeans didn’t know about America, Sidirom believes Afrikans didn’t know about it also L L. Sidirom believes Knowledge began Europeans L L, or Europeans are the smartest people in the world so if they don’t know then no one cannot possibly know L
Typical Afrocentric strawman. When lacking strong evidence rely on ad hominems.
quote: L. Racism is the ultimate tool to dumb down the masses.
And your tools have definitely dumbed you down.
quote:South Equatorial Currents: These buoys travel thousands of km (south-) westward in the South Equatorial Current (SEC) and end up in the North Brazil Current. Buoy 00001611 was initially in the eastward North Equatorial Current, then the Guinea Current, before it ended up in the SEC. Equatorial Currents lead the bouys to the Guinea Current. From West Afrika to Brazil, from Brazil to West Afrika these buoys proved it.
What i notice is that the way back of that buoy is eratic, and there is no time frame for that bouy's travel. Feel free to show it is a viable travel mode back to Africa.
quote:This is beyond Speculation, this is just plain wishful thinking to claim that people traveling a coastal route ended up migrating to South America and building similar statues that are located in West Afrika
Nice try. There are no similar statues in Africa. Amorphous blobs are not the same as the Olmec megalyths. Furthermore those blobs date to much later dates than the Olmecs.
quote:while ignoring the FACT that west Afrika is the easiest route to get to and from South America, is really funny if you think about but then again let me allow Sidirom to answer this form of Wishful thinking.
If you know what is a cross the sea and have a sturdy ship and sufficient food for the crossing. Again wishful thinking.
quote:I wonder what Sidirom would do if Knut Fladmark (LOL the names speaks volumes) told him the world was FLAT? Early people might NOT have moved south from the Bering Straight by NOT following a imaginable ice-free area that didn’t have to exist along the outer Pacific coast,” just to prove Knut Fladmark might be Knut is nuts and off the mark Fladmark.
The dumb attack on the scientist's name shows how much Hootie is grasping at straws. Posts: 36 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Originally posted by Clyde Winters: Given the numerous Olmec mining sites in MesoAmerica, large numbers of Proto-Olmec may have setlled Mexico with their families to participate in the economic boom taking place in MesoAmerica resulting from the discovery of new sources of green stone and other items important in the Saharan trade system 3500 years ago.
Yeah they traded in green stone and ignored food staples and other products of MesoAmerica. Posts: 36 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
L. Sidirom believes Knowledge began Europeans L 
Originally posted by Clyde Winters:
Printer-friendly view of this topic