Newsgroup sci.archaeology 46448

Directory

Subject: Re: Archaeology and geology? -- From: matthuse@ix.netcom.com(August Matthusen)
Subject: Re: Archaeology and geology? -- From: heinrich@intersurf.com (P. V. Heinrich)
Subject: Re: Atlantis - The Lost Continent -- From: neilunreal@aol.com (NeilUnreal)
Subject: Learning Hieroglyphics -- From: neilunreal@aol.com (NeilUnreal)
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most. -- From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks -- From: gothic@netaxs.com (Matt Kriebel)
Subject: Re: Learning Hieroglyphics -- From: Greg Reeder
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most. -- From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most. -- From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Subject: Re: Mummies Flesh sold in Europe: -- From: saida@aol.com (Saida)
Subject: Live on Tuesdays on the Web -- From: mike926@aol.com (Mike926)
Subject: Re: Clovis: Need info about clovis in Asia -- From: "Paul V. Heinrich"
Subject: Re: KMT article: Quibell at Hierakonpolis -- From: Greg Reeder
Subject: New Pharohs tomb found? -- From: Xina
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: -- From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Subject: Re: Clovis: Need info about clovis in Asia -- From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: -- From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks -- From: renae@saratoga (Renae Ransdorf)
Subject: Re: Edgar Casey--The theory of civilization not yet known to man--undiscovered -- From: Jon
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks -- From: degrafx@netwrx.net (Gilgamesh)
Subject: Re: Pyramids and Aliens -- From: gans@scholar.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans)
Subject: Re: Pyramids and Aliens -- From: gans@scholar.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans)
Subject: ARK OF COVENANT FOUND IN ISRAEL !! (???) -- From: mortenm@mail.link.no (Morten Mjøsdal)
Subject: Early Scripts and "Tokens" -- From: VCBROWN@delphi.com

Articles

Subject: Re: Archaeology and geology?
From: matthuse@ix.netcom.com(August Matthusen)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 17:30:25 GMT
In 
rejohnsn@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu writes: 
>
>Should archaeology undergrads be required to minor in geology, or
>should archaeology be a B.S. instead of a B.A.?
>
>Certainly geology is useful, but pedology and geomorphology are really
>the only widespread geological needs of archaeologists.  Cave geology 
>isn't relevant to most archaeologists, and mineralogy is only of 
>particular use to lithic analysts.  I'm not that interested in the 
>minutiae of lithic analysis.
I'd suggest that sedimentology and stratigraphy would also be useful,
but as a geologist, I'm probably biased.
Regards,
August Matthusen
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Archaeology and geology?
From: heinrich@intersurf.com (P. V. Heinrich)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 14:20:49 -0600
In article <51eq3h$sdm@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>, 
matthuse@ix.netcom.com(August Matthusen) wrote:
+ In 
+ rejohnsn@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu writes: 
+ >
+ >Should archaeology undergrads be required to minor in geology, or
+ >should archaeology be a B.S. instead of a B.A.?
Although a geologist myself, I feel it would be going overboard to 
require a minor in geology for all archaeologists.  However, they 
should be required to have had some exposure to geology and soil 
science.  The precise courses would depend on the type of 
archaeology in which they are interested in.  For example,
a historical archaeologist would likely benefit more from a pedology 
course than a course in sedimentology. 
+ >Certainly geology is useful, but pedology and geomorphology are really
+ >the only widespread geological needs of archaeologists.  Cave geology 
+ >isn't relevant to most archaeologists, and mineralogy is only of 
+ >particular use to lithic analysts.  I'm not that interested in the 
+ >minutiae of lithic analysis.
+ 
+ I'd suggest that sedimentology and stratigraphy would also be useful,
+ but as a geologist, I'm probably biased.
What might be best would be a geoarchaeology / archaeological geology
course that would introduce all to an archaeological student.  Then, the
student with the help of his advisor, could decide which of these he /she
needs to learn more about.  This is question that a person needs to
talk over with their advisor or someone in the field of archaeology
in which they are interested.  As in all things in life, as interests 
change, a person will have to learn new stuff on his / her own once
out of school.
For example, an archaeologist interested in the prehistoric archaeology
of southern Louisiana would definitely need a strong background in the 
sedimentology and geomorphology of fluvial and coastal systems which 
would not be useful to a Paleolithic archaeologist in France.
Sincerely,
Paul V. Heinrich                 All comments are the
heinrich@intersurf.com     personal opinion of the writer and
Baton Rouge, LA                do not constitute policy and/or
                           opinion of government or corporate
                           entities.  This includes my employer.
To persons uninstructed in natural history, their country 
or seaside stroll is a walk through a gallery filled with 
wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have their faces
turned to the wall.
- T. H. Huxley
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Atlantis - The Lost Continent
From: neilunreal@aol.com (NeilUnreal)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 15:23:29 -0400
>I have read that almost everyone who has gone to Troy is always
>disappointed because it is so small and grungy. Interesting that our
>building skills have gotten a lot better in 3000 years, but, no one can
>write poetry any better (or make superlatives any more super) than Homer.
Well put!
+-----
|  NeilUnreal
|
|  Sometimes a surrealist painting of a pipe is
|  just a surrealist painting of a pipe.
|
|       - Ce n'est pas une citation.
+-----
Return to Top
Subject: Learning Hieroglyphics
From: neilunreal@aol.com (NeilUnreal)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 15:23:42 -0400
I am learning Egyptian hieroglyphics on an amateur basis.  This week I
attempted hieroglyphic immersion learning by transliterating my grocery
list into hieroglyhpics.  I must be making progress -- I got home from the
store with everything I needed and nothing extra!  
I have a copy of K.T. Zauzich's book (translated by A.M. Roth) and a
translated and transliterated copy of the Book of the Dead.  Are there
other translated/transliterated texts available inexpensively?  Learning
from the the texts themselves seems more rewarding than rote memorization.
 Also, can anyone suggest any other lexicons and grammars which are either
in print or are widely available on the used book market?  
+-----
|  NeilUnreal
|
|  Sometimes a surrealist painting of a pipe is
|  just a surrealist painting of a pipe.
|
|       - Ce n'est pas une citation.
+-----
Return to Top
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most.
From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 19:36:22 GMT
In article , piotrm@umich.edu says...
>
>In article <50vhk3$icg@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) 
writes:
>I wrote:
>
>>>
>>>>" There is no archaeological evidence for any human occupation 
>>>>in southern Mesopotamia before the "Obeid 0" level "
>
>You replied with insults and the following:
>
>>"The first evidence of inhabitation in Saudi Arabia during the 
>>Mousterian period was made on the summit of Umm Wual (II/19, 
>>31deg47',38deg55') at north east of Turaif (II/18) and south 
>>west of Jebel Aneiza (II/29), the focal triangulation point 
>>where Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iraq meet from where typologically 
>>levalloiso-Mousterian flints were collected by Henry Field 
>>during his expedition in 1927 and later on. The flint 
>>implements were found on the top of a mud flat and were 
>>bearing both magnificent desert varnish also a deep brown 
>>patina, Around this area even upto a distance of 20-25 miles 
>>flints were found scattered on the surface, Besides this area 
>>Field recorded flint implements at numerous places of northern 
>>Saudi Arabia; for instance at Jebel Rijjiat at Ashad, Jebel 
>>Agrin (Igrin) Tuleyil en Naij, Maggal, Turaif Tell el Hibr; 
>>here flint source was found and Jebel Aneiza 
>>(Field, 1960 (b), 47-52, 146)" [Nayeem p 45]
>
>This is not what we are talking about and you know it.  Saudi Arabia is not 
>Mesopotamia.
The issue is whether the Ubaid pottery found at some forty sites
along the Gulf coast starting at Faikala and ranging as far south 
as Quatar and as far inland as Ain Dar, and Hofuf is evidence of
settlement or trade. You deny it is evidence of trade and therefore
must subscribe to the theory that it is early evidence of settlement
which extends the Ubaid territory and southern mesopotamia as far south
as any settled part of modern Saudi Arabia.
>>>
>
>>The 8000 some odd tablets at Ebla were found in Palace G which is dated to 
>>the Early Bronze age. 
>
>>That doesn't necessarily mean the tablets all date to the early bronze age.
>
>>Some of the texts dated to the reigns of three rulers who took the title 
>>malikum "maker of the people" (compare the arabic salla'm a'lekum or "peace 
>>make among the people") and had lugals or govenors serving below them at
>>the end of the Early Dynastic period c 2334 BC.
>
>This is incorrect on many levels.
No pun intended ...eh?
>First, the tablets found at Ebla almost all date from the 
reign of tho or three rulers from the Early Dynastic period. 
Isn't that what I just said? 
"That doesn't necessarily mean the tablets all date to the early 
bronze age. Some of the texts dated to the reigns of three rulers
...at the end of the Early Dynastic period c 2334 BC."
Palace G where the tablets were
found does not necessarily serve to date them.
>The internal structure and dating of the texts was disputed 
>for a while, but is now well established.
As you have often pointed out the internal structure
and dating of texts is still subject to much dispute...
What momentious  discovery is it that you have decided will 
bring all further discussion of mesopotamian texts to an end
thus putting you out of work?
>One stela was found that is somewhat later and 
>one tablet that is contemporary with the Old Babylonian period.
So this library contained texts from a wide range of dates?
I said: "That doesn't necessarily mean the tablets all date 
to the early bronze age. Some of the texts dated to the reigns 
of three rulers...at the end of the Early Dynastic period c 2334 BC."
You said: "First, the tablets found at Ebla almost all date from the 
reign of tho or three rulers from the Early Dynastic period."
Then you qualified that by saying:
"One stela was found that is somewhat later and 
one tablet that is contemporary with the Old Babylonian period."
What are you arguing with me about?
>The archives of palace G are all dated just before the 
>time of Sargon of Akkad. 
So what? The accension of Sargon I of Agade c 2334 BC marks the 
end of the Early Dynastic period in Mesopotamia, which if you 
scroll up a few lines you will see is exactly what I just said.
>I have no idea what the rest of this paragraph has to do with the 
>discussion, but it is again a mess.
Please don't take this as an insult, but I have noted both 
that you do seem to have difficulty following the discussion
and often appear to be in a great rush (no time to spellcheck).
If you are not familiar with the material perhaps you should 
take the time to refresh your memory before replying.
>The Eblaite word for ruler has the root MLK which is well known 
>from other Semitic languages (including Hebrew, Amorite and Akkadian,
>although in the latter language it is not usually used for "king")
The title malikum used with lugal
First: The root of Lugal is Lu = man
Fellow / Lu
Human / Lu
Human Being / Lu-Lu
People / Lu
Man / Lu
Man / Lu
Man / Lu-Lu
Man / Lu-U-Lu
Man (treacherous) / Lu-Lul
Treacherous / Lul-La
Treachery / Lul
Consider the adjective Mah = Great
Numerous / Mah
Great / Mah
Other senses of the suffix other than great
Boat / Ma (make a boat)
Boatman / Ma-La (make a course)
Burn (to) / Ma (make a fire)
Exalted / Mah
Exalted / Mah
Prophet / Lu-Mah
I think Lugal is composed from
Man / Lu
and 
Place (to) / Gal to get
Owner / Lugal
King / Lugal
Kingdom / Nam-Lu-Gal
Kings / Lugal-Ene
Kingship / Nam-Lugal
King (big man) / Lugal (The owner of the place)
I think the root of malikum is "Prince"
modified by Mah= Great
and lu = man
with
Prince / I-Ku
Great - Man - Prince = mah-lu-I-ku
and  perhaps with the adjective; kum = Hot  
[kum = hot; as in (burn, eat, consume; passionate, a leader)]
Hot / Kum (-Ma)
Leader / I-Ku
Leader / Ku
Consume / Ku 
Food / Ku
Judge / Ku
Livelihood / Ku
Eat (to give) / Ku
Eat(to) / Ku
Determiner / Ku
Treacherous leader or false prohet ku-lul-la, kul-la, killa, killer
Man (treacherous) / Lu-Lul
Treacherous / Lul-La
Treachery / Lul
Mah-lu-I-ku-kum = Ma[h]L[u]I-K[u]Kum = malikum
Is there another sense to this phrae?
subtracting the adjective Mah = Great we get likum
compare this to the phrase "sallam ma l'kheum"
which means "peace among you" in a colloguial sense
>and has nothing at all to to with salam alekum 
>which means "peace be onto you," in 
>which kum is the pronoun "you,"!
In Sumerian kum means hot.
Hot / Kum (-Ma)
I have been told there is an etymology
stemming from "sallam ma l'kheum " 
a greeting which arose amongst nomadic bedouins
meeting on the desert as tribes or clans 
with the sense of
"make peace among the people or we will fight"
[we could make things hot for you if you fight us]
and that the proper response is a'l'kheum sallam
which means "among you peace"
given to the leaders own followers
(peace make among the people)
peace - great - people - wipe out = sallam ma l'kheum 
Wipe out (to) / Ku-Lam compare the English "calamity"
Sumer land / Kalam
Destroy (to) / Ku-Lam
>>The bulk of the site dates to the middle bronze age c 2000 -1600 BC 
>>and the palace with its library [tablets were stored on shelves like 
>>modern books in a Library] was destroyed when Ebla was sacked by 
>>Hurrians under Mursalis I c 1600 BC who then went on to savage Babylon.
>
>The library was destroyed much earlier; 
>people have argued if it was Sargon or 
>Naram-Sin, 
Sargon is c 2334 BC and his reign marks the end of the 
Early Dynastic period. The Library is dated to some time
prior to the end of the Early Dynastic period having
been written over a span of three rulers coming at 
the end of that period. 
Naram Sin was Sargons grandson who ruled c 2254-2218 BC. 
The people of Ebla apparently became illiterate for 
some reason and ceased writing at least a century 
before an alabaster jar lid from the reign of Pepi I 
dated c 2289-2255 BC found its way into palace G.
The Ebalites certainly had close contact with Mari 
to their east which was destroyed after being conquered 
in the reign of Naram Sin by Shamsi Adad who ruled Mari 
for 33 years and claimed to have conquered all the way
to the Meditteranean. Mari was finally destroyed in the 
reign of Zimri Lim by Hammurabi c 1757 BC.
If Shamsi Adad conquered Ebla on his way to the Mediterranean,
in the reign of Naram Sin he couldn't have done much of a job 
on much of the city for the bulk of it was still around to
be destroyed by Mursilis c 1600 BC when he destroyed Aleppo.
>but I have no idea where you got the idea from that it was the 
>Hittites in 1600! 
"Ebla was sacked in about 1600 BC, perhaps by the Hittite king
Mursilis I who went on to capture Babylon"
Michael Roaf, "Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia", p 87 "Ebla"
Equinox, 1990
Palace G was destroyed c 2300 BC, the rest of the city was
destroyed at a much later date c 1600 BC.
>>The bulk of the site has not yet been excavated. The language of the
>>tablets was closely related to Akkadian. "Many of the gods referenced 
>>in the texts including Baal, Lim, Rasap and El were known from later 
>>periods in the west".
>>>
>>The list goes one and on...
Ibid
>
>Actually, if you kept up with the Ebla excavations, 
>you would know that a very large amount of the mound 
>has been exposed.  The latest report by P. Matthiae 
>shows much of the mound as excavated.  As to the language, 
>the situation is much more complicated as there has been a 
>lively debate on how to classify "Eblaite."  
In 1990 the site covered 55 ha to a depth of 15m. If that has
all been cleared in 6 years by P Matthiae, I would be more than
suprised. I would suggest rather that what has been cleared is 
the central temple mound where the texts were found.
>Some would link it with East Semitic (Akkadian), and even 
>go so far as to call it a dialect of Akkadian, while others 
>see it as more of a West Semitic language.
It was first linked to an early dialect of Hebrew but the
present consensus is Akkadian. There are twenty or so literary
texts written in the Sumerian and Ebalite languages.
>
>>>>Cuneiform originates c 2400 BC becomes widespread 
in the 2nd millenium
>>>
>>>Another patent invention on your part, as the Uruk IV 
>>>tablets are generally dated to 3200 or 3100. 
Michael Roaf page 70 "The Origins of Writing"
"The earliest known examples of writing are found on 
clay tablets from Uruk dating to about 3300 BC. Already 
it was a complete system with more than 700 different signs.
Pictographic sign c 3100 BC 
	(examples of recognizable pictures)
Cuneiform Sign c 2400 BC 
	(examples of abstracted but still recognizable pictures)
Cuneiform sign c 700 BC 
	(turned through 90 degrees and abstracted beyond recognition)
>
>>>
>>>>However, with its destruction Hamurabbi completed his unification of
>>>>Mesopotamia, ...
>>>
>>>Sorry, but you overestimate the importance of Hammubapi, 
>>>as there were other more important kingdoms in the region 
>>>at the time, including Aleppo (Yamhad)
Ok, that sounds like a testable hypothesis...
How many cities were allied with Aleppo and how many
did Hammurabi bring into alliance with his Babylon?
>>>in th west and the Elamites in the east, to whom H. 
>>>was a vassal for many years.  
>>>The destruction of Mari has nothing to do with H.' 
>>>"unification" of Mesopotamia which ended with his 
>>>conquest of Larsa.
>
>>Well, ok, here I disagree. That statement is roughly equivalent to saying
>>the invasion of Normandy had nothing to do with beating the Germans and 
>>winning the 2nd World War which ended with the surrender of the Japanese. 
>>>
>I fail to see what this has to do with the price of eggs. 
Maybe you need to stop selling ostrich eggs, or at the very
least quit burying your head in the sand. 
My statement that the conquest of Mari had more to do with the
ultimate unification of Mesopotamia because of its control of the
trade coming up and down the Euphrates, than the conquest of Larsa
which was the result of the conquest of Mari is an analagous situation.
Many a chess match is decided in the opening, not won in the end game.
>
>>>>Sorry, It is listed in Michael Roafs "Cultural Atlas of Mesopotamia"
>>>>as a part of Hamurrabbis Kingdom and so shown on the Map on page 120
>>>>Syria as a kingdom did not yet exist. Even today it is on the border
>>>>of Syria as I properly noted.
>
>Syria is a geographical concept and he name is used in archeology and 
>philology as separate from the modern state.  I am not interested in 
>how it is represented in an atlas. 
You should be interested in this Atlas. The borders of Modern Syria 
and other mideastern states are more the product of oil lobbies
influence in the diplomatic negotiations after the second world war
than any sort of archaeological or historical territory. The Kurds
are an excellent example of this. Michael Roafs analysis helps
make it clear why.
>The bottom line is that the city was conquered by Hammpurabi 
>but then two years later destroyed by him and was never reoccupied. 
Hammurabi was conducting a military campaign. How important is the
city of Bastogne in 1996?
> A ruin is hardly an imporant part of anyone's kingdom.  
>The history of the Old Babylonian kingdom after the death 
>of Hammurabi is complex and not well known due to lack of sources.   
>
>
>>>Once again, you have no idea what my specialization is 
>>>and how wid or narrow my knowledge might be. 
>
>You wrote:
>
>>Actually I know a lot about you. I know you like music,
>>in particular the saxaphone and jazz guitar and you can't 
>>stand rock and roll. You think Kenny Burrell is better than 
>>Al DiMiola (sheesh) You are at the University of Michigan
>>and you consider yourself knowledgable about Mesopotamia.
>
>>You probably didn't like Chic Correa either...
>
>Yoy really are not only rather ignorant and rude but also rather silly.
Yoy !
>So you can rummage around the internet, 
>but refuse to read anything serious on 
>matters you discuss. 
I am serious even if I'm kidding... It would help it you could 
learn how to take a little ribbing without sputtering inarticulately
and frothing at the mouth.
>As for my private life, that is private, but as far as 
>music goes, I indeed do not particularly like lightweights 
>such as Al DiMiola,
this explains a lot...:)
>and I cannot stand Corea. 
of course...:)
> I am not very interested in you lecturing me about 
>that, as I assume that your knowledge there is similar 
>to that of your knowledge of Mesopotamia.
Ok, I will just continue letting you blow me out of the water
with statements like your assertions that there were no trees 
or people in Mesopotamia, prior to the Ubaid...:) 
>Now you have added Arabic to this, as your novel 
>misinterpretation of one of the commonest phrases 
>in the language well demonstrates!
al'ekheum s'allamah....:)
>If you are going to be rude and abusive, you might learn some 
>basic facts first.
keep it up, I love it:)
>
>Just as a matter of curiosity, since now you have zeroed in 
>on the Hittites and Hurrians in 1600 or so--what exactly are 
>the ancient sources that you are relying on for your analysis?  
>Not secondary atlases etc., but the actual original information. 
First you think I haven't read enough of the literature
and then you complain I am using secondary sources?
hmmmmmmmmm...
Perhaps you are right to chide me Piotr,
now that I consider it more carefully, 
I must admit I wasn't there then
so I don't know for sure,... 
were you? ...Be sure and 
tell me what I missed...
>Do you know, for example, what the actual original 
>information is on the Hittite raid on Babylon 
>(which you insist was done by Hurrians, and this is only a guess).?
Don't tell me, ...I bet you have the original newsreal footage...:)
steve
Return to Top
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks
From: gothic@netaxs.com (Matt Kriebel)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 16:53:46 GMT
Jiri Mruzek (jirimruzek@lynx.bc.ca) wrote:
: Matt Kriebel wrote:
: 
: . You'll notice that few 'alien advocates' rarely suggest that
: > technically magnificent european structures (Hia Sophia, for ionstance)
: > were built by aliens.
:  
: How many of these European mosques and cathedrals would it take
: to equal the weight of the Great Pyramid (7 Million tons)? 
How many flying buttresses are there on the pyramids? How many domes like
Hia sophia are there on the pyramids? Why is it that the Cathedrals of
Europe have a shape of the cross that can only seen from above? 
: All of them - and still some room left?
: I am a European, but ALL the buildings in Europe PALE (pun intended)
: in comparison to the Pyramid. 
In size yes, if those structures were to fall apart they would fall into a
pile not unlike a small pyramids. In fact, a misshappen pyramid is such a
simple structre that the only thing impressive about the great pyramids is
their sheer size.
:That makes me racist, as the rest of 
: your post had suggested?
Yes, becuase what you're saying is that your ancestors were capable of
building things but Egptian ancestors couldn't. SOunds pretty damnn racist
to me. 
: Listen, buddy, U brought these accusations up, so remember: 
: Just a predisposition to toying with the term signals a racist,
: or a supressed racist.. I only know one super-race of Humans. 
: Typologies like black, white, yellow, brown, and red serve only 
: purposes of quick, peremptory identification in the course of some 
: description, where it may, or may not stand in the first place, in
: the order of importance. For instance, if someone is 7-feet tall,
: you will most likely start the description of such an individual with
: this characteristic, and not with the fact that the oner is of this
: or that color, or is bespectacled, and has a big nose.
: Ergo:
:  
: YOU DARE TO CALL ME RACIST? - You unfortunate idiot.. 
I never said you didn't love your fellow man or accuse you of burning
crosses on someones lawn. I pointed out that your claims are weakening
human, and personal history by removing ancient Egypts most lasting
accomplishments.
: There, my coin covers your small change, for isn't racism just part
: to Stupidity in general? 
: Note that your name pretty well guarantees you to be an Aryan type
: like myself, 
Yeah, sure, Brown Hair, Brown Eyes, Your just don't find anyone more
Nordic and Aryan than me....
:(I am a Nordic sub-type - pun intended - I look what
: Himmler wanted his SS-men to look like (when in shape), except,
: I am 25-percent Jewish, and 75-percent Slavonian :)
Gee, I always love when a crank winds up to accuse his detractors of being
NAzi's.
: so by directing 
: my protest at you, I am definitely Not being racist. 
Ah, I see, so in other words you think that: "If I attack the guy with the
Germanic-sounding name, I will prove I'm not a racist"
Well, just a little hint before you start spouting the old  =
Nazi! attack. 'Kriebel' is Silesian, as in Polish, got it?
This is only going to go downhill on his end folks.
Matt Kriebel      *  This .sig is no longer small or easily digestible!    
gothic@netaxs.com *  No, I'm not a goth. I just have an architecture fetish.
***************************************************************************
Not so much a shotgun approach, more like a double-loaded grapeshot approach.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Learning Hieroglyphics
From: Greg Reeder
Date: 14 Sep 1996 20:34:47 GMT
neilunreal@aol.com (NeilUnreal) wrote:
>I am learning Egyptian hieroglyphics on an amateur basis.  This week I
>attempted hieroglyphic immersion learning by transliterating my grocery
>list into hieroglyhpics.  I must be making progress -- I got home from the
>store with everything I needed and nothing extra!  
>
>I have a copy of K.T. Zauzich's book (translated by A.M. Roth) and a
>translated and transliterated copy of the Book of the Dead.  Are there
>other translated/transliterated texts available inexpensively?  Learning
>from the the texts themselves seems more rewarding than rote memorization.
> Also, can anyone suggest any other lexicons and grammars which are either
>in print or are widely available on the used book market?  
>
>+-----
>|  NeilUnreal
If you want hieroglyphic texts to try your translating skills check out 
AN EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHIC READING BOOK:For Beginners by E.A. Wallis Budge 
and printed by Dover. Plus there is EGYPTIAN READING BOOK by A. DE BUCK 
that is published by Ares Publishers, Chicago. The last two just have the 
hieroglyphic texts without translations. One with the hieroglyphic texts 
and the translations  is LEGENDS OF THE EGYPTIAN GODS by E.A. Wallis 
Budge and it is also a Dover publication.
-- 
Greg Reeder
On the WWW
at Reeder's Egypt Page
---------------->http://www.sirius.com/~reeder/egypt.html
reeder@sirius.com
Return to Top
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most.
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 18:40:51
In article <51f1fm$4f5@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) writes:
>
>The title malikum used with lugal
>First: The root of Lugal is Lu = man
>Fellow / Lu
>Human / Lu
>Human Being / Lu-Lu
>People / Lu
>Man / Lu
>Man / Lu
>Man / Lu-Lu
>Man / Lu-U-Lu
>Man (treacherous) / Lu-Lul
>Treacherous / Lul-La
>Treachery / Lul
>Consider the adjective Mah = Great
>I think the root of malikum is "Prince"
>modified by Mah= Great
>and lu = man
>with
>Prince / I-Ku
>Great - Man - Prince = mah-lu-I-ku
>and  perhaps with the adjective; kum = Hot  
>[kum = hot; as in (burn, eat, consume; passionate, a leader)]
>Hot / Kum (-Ma)
>Leader / I-Ku
>Leader / Ku
>Consume / Ku 
>Food / Ku
>Judge / Ku
>Livelihood / Ku
>Eat (to give) / Ku
>Eat(to) / Ku
>Determiner / Ku
>Treacherous leader or false prohet ku-lul-la, kul-la, killa, killer
lugal is, quite simply, one of the Sumian words for "king," and may, or may 
not be analyzed as lu gal, great man.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with 
the West Semitic root mlk.  At Ebla the word sign for king was EN, presumably 
read as malikum.  There is no etymological element "kum" in it at all, as the 
stem is malik- + u (nominative ending) and m (so called mimation, which is 
known only from Eblaite and Akkadian, possibly related to Arabic nunation).  
This is child's play grammar, and it is not an issue of debate.  Most of the 
list you give is either from different languages or, in some cases incorrect, 
for example Sumerian "to eat" is really gu, not ku.  You cannot analyze 
Semitic words as part Sumerian part horse or donkey.  At this point the 
discussion has reached a level of absurdity that no answere can suffice.  
Quite frankly, the only reason that some of us answer you is in the hope that 
someone out there will know that there is an alternative to such nonsense.  If 
you want to argue that "Steve"  is really the English abbreviation St. + the 
name "Eve", that would be the same as the kind of uninformed analysis you have 
given for Semitic mlk. which has no "etymology" at all, but is a basic root in 
the languages involved.  This has gone too far.  If you wish to continue this 
king of disinformation, others can play with you.  I assume that there are 
others out there who realize that you cannot just rewite the Arabic language, 
or any other, to suit whatever fancy strikes you.  Once again--good luck.  I 
have this sneaking suspicion that Steve is really just a little kid who gets a 
charge out of tweaking the noses of adults.  Have fun!
Return to Top
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia: was: Linguistic debates are of marginal archaeological interest to most.
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 18:25:52
In article <51f1fm$4f5@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) writes:
>>I wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>>" There is no archaeological evidence for any human occupation 
>>>>>in southern Mesopotamia before the "Obeid 0" level "
>
>The issue is whether the Ubaid pottery found at some forty sites
>along the Gulf coast starting at Faikala and ranging as far south 
>as Quatar and as far inland as Ain Dar, and Hofuf is evidence of
>settlement or trade. You deny it is evidence of trade and therefore
>must subscribe to the theory that it is early evidence of settlement
>which extends the Ubaid territory and southern mesopotamia as far south
>as any settled part of modern Saudi Arabia.
>>>>
Look, to put it as simply as possible, the earliest occupation that has been 
found in southern Mesopotamia has been labeled Ubaid/Obeiod 0 precisely 
because it is found in a layer right under what had hitherto been considered 
Ubaid 1. What does the fact that Ubaid pottery had been found in the Gulf have 
to do with the fact that Ubaid 0 is still the earliest known occupation in 
southern Mesopotamia?  Do  you know of any older? IF so, you are the only 
person that does.
>>(snip)
>Palace G where the tablets were
>found does not necessarily serve to date them.
Actually in the case of the Ebla archives we have a true library that was 
found in almost pristine form, so it correlates rather well with the 
archaeology.  As for the dating, it has been done primarily on paleographical 
grounds, on the basis of the contents, and more recently, on synchronisms.
I wrote:
>>One stela was found that is somewhat later and 
>>one tablet that is contemporary with the Old Babylonian period.
You countered:
>So this library contained texts from a wide range of dates?
>The title malikum used with lugal
>First: The root of Lugal is Lu = man
>Fellow / Lu
>Human / Lu
>Human Being / Lu-Lu
>People / Lu
>Man / Lu
>Man / Lu
>Man / Lu-Lu
>Man / Lu-U-Lu
>Man (treacherous) / Lu-Lul
>Treacherous / Lul-La
>Treachery / Lul
>Consider the adjective Mah = Great
>Numerous / Mah
>Great / Mah
>Other senses of the suffix other than great
>Boat / Ma (make a boat)
>Boatman / Ma-La (make a course)
>Burn (to) / Ma (make a fire)
>Exalted / Mah
>Exalted / Mah
>Prophet / Lu-Mah
>I think Lugal is composed from
>Man / Lu
>and 
>Place (to) / Gal to get
>Owner / Lugal
>King / Lugal
>Kingdom / Nam-Lu-Gal
>Kings / Lugal-Ene
>Kingship / Nam-Lugal
>King (big man) / Lugal (The owner of the place)
>I think the root of malikum is "Prince"
>modified by Mah= Great
>and lu = man
>with
>Prince / I-Ku
>Great - Man - Prince = mah-lu-I-ku
>and  perhaps with the adjective; kum = Hot  
>[kum = hot; as in (burn, eat, consume; passionate, a leader)]
>Hot / Kum (-Ma)
>Leader / I-Ku
>Leader / Ku
>Consume / Ku 
>Food / Ku
>Judge / Ku
>Livelihood / Ku
>Eat (to give) / Ku
>Eat(to) / Ku
>Determiner / Ku
>Treacherous leader or false prohet ku-lul-la, kul-la, killa, killer
>Man (treacherous) / Lu-Lul
>Treacherous / Lul-La
>Treachery / Lul
>Mah-lu-I-ku-kum = Ma[h]L[u]I-K[u]Kum = malikum
To say that this is all rubbish is an understatement.  You seem to have no 
inkling as to comparative Semitics, the structure of Semitic roots, nor do you 
even know what word is from what language!  mlk is the root and has nothing to 
do with kum, which is Sumerian, nor any of these other nonsense things.  
>Is there another sense to this phrae?
>subtracting the adjective Mah = Great we get likum
>compare this to the phrase "sallam ma l'kheum"
>which means "peace among you" in a colloguial sense
>>and has nothing at all to to with salam alekum 
>>which means "peace be onto you," in 
>>which kum is the pronoun "you,"!
>In Sumerian kum means hot.
>Hot / Kum (-Ma)
Look, if you are going to rewrite the Arabic language, not even knowing how to 
parse the simplest phrase, then there is nothing to discuss.  I cannot insist 
that there is such a thing as a basic grammar to a language.  If you want to 
clain that the common Arabic dative pronoun (actually common Semitic) is the 
Sumerian word for "hot" the do so by all means.  I have no answer to that.
(illogical stuff snipped)
>>
I wrote:
>>Actually, if you kept up with the Ebla excavations, 
>>you would know that a very large amount of the mound 
>>has been exposed.  The latest report by P. Matthiae 
>>shows much of the mound as excavated.  As to the language, 
>>the situation is much more complicated as there has been a 
>>lively debate on how to classify "Eblaite."  
You answered:
>In 1990 the site covered 55 ha to a depth of 15m. If that has
>all been cleared in 6 years by P Matthiae, I would be more than
>suprised. I would suggest rather that what has been cleared is 
>the central temple mound where the texts were found.
The site has been excavated for years.  When Matthiae found the library in 
1976 , he had already been digging for 12 years.  Twenty years later, he 
has managed to uncover quite bit.  I don't care what you surmise, just check 
his latest reports and see for yourself.
>
(silly comments in music snipped)
>>Do you know, for example, what the actual original 
>>information is on the Hittite raid on Babylon 
>>(which you insist was done by Hurrians, and this is only a guess).?
>Don't tell me, ...I bet you have the original newsreal footage...:)
Well, that settles it all then, right?  I ma happy to know that you have a 
copy of Roaf's Atlas, but it simply will not do as a source of information for 
the kind of outlandish speculations that you propose.  Get some facts, and, 
please, leave the Arabic language alone. 
Enough, please.  Go back to the Greeks being Phoenicians and all that other 
lovely stuff and leave Mesopotamia alone, please.  Otherwise, please try to 
inform yourself before you post.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Mummies Flesh sold in Europe:
From: saida@aol.com (Saida)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 17:32:10 -0400
>Since I don't do graverobbing, I can't claim any authority here, but it 
>seems to me that after human flesh has aged into four digits the color of
>the original skin would be speculation. 
>Steve Russell
In the case of Egyptian mummies, the skin is always changed to darkish
brown or black and it is NEVER used to determine the ethnicity of the
mummy.  In a very few cases, the facial features and hair showed the
individual to be a black person.  
Return to Top
Subject: Live on Tuesdays on the Web
From: mike926@aol.com (Mike926)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 17:32:30 -0400
	A N N O U N C E M E N T
	        Live on the Internet every Tuesday Night
	" Mysteries of the Bible Revealed and Resolved"
Contrary to the popular opinion created by Time and Newsweek, every
historical event in the Tanakh can be found in the archaeological and
historical records of the Near East when the revised chronology is taken
into account. All events from Sodom and Gomorrah, through the captivity
in Egypt, the subsequent conquest of the land of Canaan to the story of
Esther will be presented in its archaeological and historical context
and the Biblical account shown to be completely accurate.
Every Tuesday night, one topic will be presented live on the Internet
starting in January 1997 with visuals, expert interaction and debate by
all who wish to be involved. Each topic will be presented to enable the
widest possible audience to understand and participate. Moderated by
experts in each field. 
 Please inform all your friends and ask them to send their e-mail address
to:
		 Mike92620@Juno.com 
for ongoing information.
Some topics to be covered include:-
Creation vs. Evolution
Codes in the Torah.
Sodom & Gomorrah: 1.5 million bodies found!
The Famines of the Patriachs- In Egyptian Records!
The Pyramids and The Sphinx, tombs or .......?
Kabbalah.
Who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus?
Dan, Dan, The Travelling Man
The Hyksos/The Israelites.
The Jericho Story:- The Bible and the Archaeology match at last.
The City of David found.
Solomon's Family- a son in Egypt!
Raiders of the Lost Ark:- Found.
Hear Oh Israel, Where Oh Israel?...The Lost tribes....found.
Ezra and The Great Assembly?
The Aleph-Bais, alphabet or Holy Language?
Esther the truth at last.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, a mystery solved.
The Messiah in Prophesy and Reality.
The Times of the End.
etc.etc.etc.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Clovis: Need info about clovis in Asia
From: "Paul V. Heinrich"
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 16:36:55 -0600
Subject: Re: Clovis: Need info about clovis in Asia
Dr. Rebecca Lynn Johnson
rejohnsn@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu wrote:
+On Thu, 12 Sep 1996,  Iskander Aguilar 
+ wrote:
+>Please send any information about Clovis Projectile
+>Points found in The Camchatka Peninsula.
+
+I don't think any have been.  As far as I know, 
+Clovis is a purely North American form.
My guess is that Mr. Aguilar is referring to the fluted
point noticed by Dr. Maureen King of the Desert Research
Institute in archaeological collections at Magadan, 
western Siberia.  The fluted point came from the Uptar site
on the eastern shore of the Sea of Okhotsk directly across it 
and west of the Kamchatka Peninsula.  Dating of volcanic
ash and charcoal at the site indicate that the point is about
8300 years old.  There is an article by Dr. Maureen King 
and Dr. Sergel Slobodin in the August 2, 1996 'Science' and
a small article in the August 3, 1996 'Science News' (vol.
150, no. 5, p. 73) about this fluted point.
It is not a Clovis point, but it is the first Paleo-
Indian like projectile point found in Asia.
I hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Paul V. Heinrich           All comments are the
heinrich@intersurf.com     personal opinion of the writer and
Baton Rouge, LA            do not constitute policy and/or
                           opinion of government or corporate
                           entities.  This includes my employer.
To persons uninstructed in natural history, their country 
or seaside stroll is a walk through a gallery filled with 
wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have their faces
turned to the wall.
- T. H. Huxley
Return to Top
Subject: Re: KMT article: Quibell at Hierakonpolis
From: Greg Reeder
Date: 14 Sep 1996 22:03:12 GMT
mark@rostau.demon.co.uk (Mark Wilson) wrote:
>I read with interest the above article in the Fall 96 issue of KMT about James
>E. Quibell's discoveries at Hierakonpolis, but was surprised to read on P59,
>that the decoration of the so-called tomb 100 "is lost today".
>
>The funny thing is that I was sure I'd seen a photo of the original in
>Fingerprints of the Gods. I proceded to dig out my copy of FOG and sure
>enough, Fig 54 showed what appeared to be the same scene from the pre-dynastic
>tomb shown in the KMT article.
>
>I knew my copy of FOG would come in useful one day, and as I looked closer at
>Fig 54 I could see that it corresponded to the two left-most sections shown on
>P58 of KMT. It appears more damaged than in Green's watercolour, but was
>unmistakably the same scene. According to FOG this fragment is now in Gallery
>54 of the Cairo museum (see note 34 to Ch 45 of FOG). 
>
>So is this original decoration from Tomb 100 at Hierakonpolis lost or not? If
>it is lost, what is it that is in the Cairo museum?
>
>BTW, FOG dates the tomb painting to the Badarian period c.4500 B.C. Does
>anyone know if  this is correct?
>
>
>Regards
>
>Mark Wilson
>
The photo from FOG is of a display showing a copy of Green's painting 
with
extant fragments of the wall from tomb 100 set into it. In other words 
all the
peolpe, boats and animals that can be seen in the photo from FOG are in 
fact
from a copy of Green's painting and the darker inset remnants with no ( 
or badly
damaged)  painted plaster are all that remains of the tomb decoration. So 
 to say
that the decoration has been lost from tomb 100 at Hierakonpolis is no
exageration  as all we essentially have is Green's copies of the original 
wall.
Tomb 100 is dated to the Late Gerzian about 3300 BC not the Badarian 
which
is 5000 BC. See  Michael Hoffman, EGYPT BEFORE THE PHARAOHS, pgs
133 and 16.
-- 
Greg Reeder
Contributing Editor
KMT
on the WWW at
---------------->http://www.sirius.com/~reeder/kmt.html
reeder@sirius.com
Return to Top
Subject: New Pharohs tomb found?
From: Xina
Date: 14 Sep 1996 22:30:14 GMT
Can any of you substantiate or refute a rumour that I have heard floating 
around?  
Supposedly, the Egyptian authorities have found the tomb of a pharaoh near 
the
Valley of the Kings in the ancient capital Luxor, the government
newspaper al-Ahram said. The pharaoh has not yet been identified but
he belonged to the 19th dynasty, which ruled Egypt between 1320 and
1200 BC, the "silver age" of the pharaonic empire.
Is there any truth to this rumour.  I havent herd anything lately and I 
was given a bogus web site with the message in one of my mail lists.  Does 
anyone have any idea as to who the Pharaoh found may be or if there is any 
truth to this rumour?  Ive been away for a while. 
Thanks in advance!
Xina
Return to Top
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia:
From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 22:42:01 GMT
In article , piotrm@umich.edu says...
>
>In article <51eari$69f@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) 
writes:
>
>
>>From your perspective this is true. It is a Mari letter
>>which unequivocally refers to wood, which is the point
>>which was to be proved.
>
>No, this was not the point to be proved.
"...You began much of this discussion 
with a wild claim, make in very strong terms, 
that I was wrong and wood was imported from Arabia to Mari,
as evidenced by the Mari letters.  
I asked you for one single reference,..."
There you go, 
you didn't say "imported from Dilmun"
you didn't say "imported from the Gulf"
you didn't specify the species of wood
you said "wood...imported from Arabia to Mari,
as evidenced by the Mari letters..."
and asked for "one single reference,..."
which I provided...
It appears that you really don't even
know what you are saying let alone
what you are talking about.
>The issue was your insistance, with capital letters, 
>that I was wrong when I pointed out that there is no 
>evidence for wood coming from the gulf to Mari. 
There is also evidence for wood coming from the Gulf to 
the mid Euphrates in the region of Mari,...
You would probably be willing to bet money against that premise.
Let's see if you really think through all the implications of 
the things you say...
Is it your contention that the boats which carried cargos up the
Euphrates to Mari from the Gulf were not built of wood?
My point is that when you learn how to say what you mean 
clearly and unequivocally then I won't have to argue with
you over every little detail. 
"According to a later tradition the First Dynasty of the Sealand
controlled the south but so far no textual or archaeological
evidence of their presence in the region at that time has been
found. The Amorite dynasty of Babylon over the cities of the 
Euphrates almost as far as Mari." Michael Roaf, CAM
"The Kassite kings of Babylonia who probably originated in 
the Zagros region, overthrew the Sealand Dynasty and gained 
control of southeastern Mesopotamia in the middle of the 
15th century BC." "Commerce or Conquest", JReade, BTTA
"Farther upstream the independent kingdom of Hana flourished 
after the destruction of Mari under its capital city Terqua
which had previously been ruled from Mari. A pottery jar found
at Terqua during excavation of an unpretentious house contained
cloves suggesting that the trading links of Mesopotamia were as
distant as the Far East, since th natural habitat of cloves at 
that time was the East Indies" IBID
" It is one thing to speculate, it is another to bend 
"the evidence in ways that make no sense at all.
Ok, lets simplify things. I make the  point that there 
was trade up the Euphrates between the Persian Gulf and
Syria/Anatolia and you vigorously deny it. 
Your position is that articles came from everywhere else 
but the Gulf, Iran, Anatolia, Syria, Lebanon you all agree 
traded with Mesopotamia, but Dilmun, Makkan, Meluhha...no way.
"If we review the physical communications between Mesopotamia 
and the areas to its east and south, there are three routes 
which may be followed: By land through Iran, by sea through 
the Gulf, and by land through Arabia; or there is a combination 
of two or more of these routes; and within these broad divisions 
many choices may be available at one and the same time." J Reade
"Lapiz lazuli from Afghanistan and Myrrh from Yemen may 
have arrived in mesopotamia from virtually opposite directions 
by land, or may have travelled side by side in Gulf ships."Ibid
"...The Ubaid period 6000-4000 BC...Ubaid pottery has been 
found in both Mesopotamia and far down the Gulf"Ibid
"Jemdet Nasr pottery from the United Arab Emirates 
(Potts 1981:35-6)" Ibid
"(Mynors 1983) pottery from the Early Dynastic site of Abu Salibikh 
and the sites of Hili and Umm an-Nar in the United Arab Emirates 
using neutron activation for the identification of trace elements...
a significant portion of the Hili and Umm an-Nar pottery must 
have come from Mesopotamia"Ibid
"Between about 2000 and 1794 BC southeastern Mesopotamia was 
mainly ruled by kings of the cities of Isin and Larsa; then 
until 1763 by Larsa alone. The existence of a flourishing sea 
trade between the larsa state and Dilmun is recorded in documents 
found at Ur, a natural port of entry for goods from the Gulf."
>First, the caravan is not coming from Dilmun, but from 
>Ekallatum to Mari, that it it is going roughly from north 
>to south, in exactly the opposite direction that 
>your idea would require. 
I cited two texts, in the first which mentioned boxwood
as a part of the caravans cargo, we also have mention
of messengers from Dilmun. The second text describes a 
caravan which Isme Dagan has sent to Dilmun from Mari 
which got held up in Babylon on its return trip.
Another letter which I didn't cite from Samsi-Adad to his son 
Yasmah-Adad regarding the arrival of a Dilmunite messenger, 
who seems to have been something of a thief, reinforces the 
connection of Dilmun and Subat Enlil through Mari.
The text ends by saying that Mari is well Isme-Dagan is well
Shubat enlil or Subartu is located up the Hamur river from Mari
When Shamshi Adad died his son Ishme Dagan was defeated by
Elamites and by Naram Sin, Shunat Enlil fell to the Elamites and 
Zimri Lin regained the throne of Mari which he kept till 1757 BC
Michael Roaf CAM p 116
"It is in this context that we should view a letter sent by 
Yasmah Addu viceroy of Mari to Hammurabi, king of Babylon,
somewhere around 1785 BC (Dossin 1952:29-31) It refers to a 
caravan sent by Yasmah-Addu to Dilmun which had been detained 
on its return journey. it goes on to propose, after a break, 
that what is essentially the same caravan should proceed to 
Babylon and remain there untoil Yasmah-Addu sends for it. 
One of the men involved is probably a Sutean, a member of a 
pastoral tribe that seems to have been very widespread 
(Heltzer, 1981). It is clear that a land caravan *from Mari 
to the Gulf* must have passed through Babylonian territory 
or through the desert southwest of Babylonia."
>Given the context and other information from Mari, it might 
>be logical to speculate that it was in fact on its way 
>back TO DIlmun.
The text says:
ARM V 14
4 Previously your brother sent a caravan
5 to Dilmun. Now this caravan on its return
6 due to claims concerning a well
7 has been (held) at Illi-Ebuh's
It is clear the caravan is returning to Mari from Dilmun.
>Second, it is a small amount of aromatic wood that was used 
>in the making of perfume, which is a long way from the timber 
>that you think is coming.
There you go, again you quibble and disemble,
you didn't say "imported from Dilmun"
you didn't say "imported from the Gulf"
you didn't specify the species of wood
you said "wood...imported from Arabia to Mari,
as evidenced by the Mari letters..."
and asked for "one single reference,..."
which I provided...
Grumble all you want to, you are busted. 
Plain and simple...
>>
>>Does this "much improved, collated text" dispute the fact
>>that this Mari letter makes an unambiguous reference to wood
>>in the context of its being included in the caravan being
>>provisioned? Potts is not translating this in a vacum. There
>>are other references to wood being transported.
>
>>Gud Cyl A 15 LL 18
>
>>"16. gis ba-lu-ub gal-gal, gis esi, gis ab-ba bi"
>
>>G 14, 241 F13
>
>>"gis gisimmar"
>
>What does this have to do with anything?  
Don't feign ignorance. We both know there was extensive trade up
the Euphrates. It included both wood and metals but also other
luxury goods, Frankincense and Myhhr, Fabrics, precious gems
and pearls. What you wanted was to send me digging for a cite.
Did you think the Mari letters would contain the only mention 
of the trade in wood and other precious goods?
>What does a small amount of aromatics for a caravan going to 
>DIlmun have to do with timber for building a temple?
A brief recap of the discussion thus far.
The original poster asked about the ability to fire
mud bricks for ziggurats, where would they get the wood?
You said there was no wood in Mesopotamia. 
I said yes there was wood in Mesopotamia  and cited a petrified
forest in the deserts south of what had once been the Kuwait river.
You said that was not southern Mesopotamia
I expanded the definition of southern Mesopotamia to include all 
of Arabia, Dilmun and the Western Techno complex on the grounds of
Ubaid pottery finds as far south as Quatar and the UAE.
>Gudea is hundreds of years earlier, and he actually says 
>where he gets his wood from--from Iran and points east, 
>not from the gulf. 
A stone statue of Gudea, c 2200 BC initialed by him, 
is carved in stone which comes from Makkan (Modern Oman)
M Tosi "Early Maritime Cultures" BTTA p103
"seafaring merchants from the distant lands of Dilmun, Makkan 
and Meluhha tied up at Agades quay during the reign of Sargon
c 2334-2279 BC"
G Weisberger "Dilmun a Trading Entrepot"BTTA p 138
"During the reign of Gdea of Lagas copper, diorite and wood 
were delivered from Makkan and Meluhha delivered rare woods,
 gold, tin, lapis lazuli and carnelian to Lagas. Naram Sin 
warred against Makkan." Ibid
You put no condition on the timeline except to claim there 
were no people in southern mesopotamia prior to the Ubaids 
which I refuted with a mention of the some 256 sites listed 
by Nayeem.
> As to gishimmar, that is the old reading of nimbar, 
>which means date palm and there is no evidence that 
>I know that would suggest that Mesopotamia needed to 
>import it from anywhere, as that is precisely the one 
>wood they had plenty of! 
And so to get back to the original readers post,
to which you responded there were no trees in
Mesopotamia only brush, is it now your claim
that date palm does not burn?
How about pomegranites? Do they not grow on trees?
Were there no mangroves? No acacia? Are these shrubs?
>  Of course there are many references to wood being 
>transported, but it usually comes down stream, from 
>Lebanon and Iran, and not upstream from the Gulf. 
No, that is incorrect. 
Wood comes from everywhere. 
Lebanonwas famous for its cedars, but it grew no ebony of which 
I am aware. There were pine trees in Iran, but none of the
trees which gave nutmeg and myhhr. Where did sisso wood and
ab-ba (strong heart) come from? Could it have been the same
source as the tortiseshell, corundum and pearls?
>You made up all this 
No, I have cited more than fifty different authors to the same effect.
Are they all in some sort of conspiracy with me do you think?
>and now you want to throw any reference you find to the word 
>"wood" as somehow evidence for your "theory" and it simply does 
>not work.  
There you go, again you quibble and disemble,
you didn't say "imported from Dilmun"
you didn't say "imported from the Gulf"
you didn't specify the species of wood
you said "wood...imported from Arabia to Mari,
as evidenced by the Mari letters..."
and asked for "one single reference,..."
which I provided...
Grumble all you want to, you are busted. 
Plain and simple...
>As for Mari, read the inscription of king Yahdun-Lim, 
>where he specifically describes his expedition to the 
>Mediterranean coast and his cutting down of trees in 
>the mountains of Lebanon, among others.
*"among others."*
I believe it mentions getting cedar from one source, pine
from another, ebony and other exotica from all the different
places with which Mari was engaged in trade.
>Also, take a good look at the cylinders 
Ok,... why my goodness Piotr, those cylinders are made from the
sealstone of Dilmuns crystal plateau... now how did that get there?
>and inscriptions of Gudea. 
	Inscriptions of Gudea (ca. 2144-2124 B.C.E.) 
        1.Gudea Cylinder A (Latest update: 08-03-1996). 
        2.Gudea Cylinder B (Latest update: 08-03-1996). 
        3.Gudea Statue B (Latest update: 01-10-1993). 
        4.Gudea Statue A, C-AA (Latest update: 01-10-1993). 
        5.Gudea 1-99 (Latest update: 01-10-1993). 
>He mentions the sources 
>of many of the precious good for the building of the 
>temple of Ningirsu.  You simply cite "wood" out of context.
Version: March 8th, 1996
Text: Gudea Cylinder A in: F. Thureau-Dangin, "Les Cylindres de Goudea
      decouverts par Ernest de Sarzec a Tello", Textes Cuneiformes / Musee
      du Louvre, Tome VIII (= TCL 8), Paris 1925, pl. i-xxx.
Typed by: Bram Jagersma
(14) an-dul3 dagal-me gis su-zu-sze3
(18) uru-sze3 i3-du-e gis kim-gu10 he2-sa6
(19) gis kim-gu10 nu-gu10
(9) gu3-de2-a e2-gu10 du3-da gis kim-bi ga-ra-ab-sum
(11) gis kim-gu10 ha-mu-u3-zu
(19) gis su-bi mu-la2
(11) an-dul3 pa gal-gal gis su du10-ga-am3
"Krisijn makes reference to lexical texts from Ebla /tell Mardik 
in Syria which are slightly earlier than the early Dynastic IIb 
texts from Lagas and which mention for example the import of 
pure copper, (tin) bronze, tin and Dilmun tin as coming from 
Dilmun. We know from Gudea of lagas that during his reign Tin 
was imported from Meluhha andf the Indian Tin ore deposits in 
Rajasthan and Gujarat may have been exploited by the Meluhhaites."
"Animal Designs and Gulf Chronology" ECL During Caspers, BTTA p 288
>Frankly, I do not understand this kind of reasoning,
We are looking for references or examples of artifacts indicating
trade with the Gulf, either by outright mention of familiar topynms
or by mention of things which need to be imported from someplace
probably most easily reached by sea.
>no more than I do your strange Arabic etymologies,
Ok, I admit it, you are an unappreciative person, let's move on
>nor do I appreciate your rude and childish insults when called 
>upon to provide evidence for ideas that you pull out of hat.  
I provided the cite, in the form you asked for,..
Be a man, admit you were wrong and let's just stop 
with the constant whining 
>
>Why do we have to go in circles--there is no way you can 
>force the evidence to prove your point. 
Sorry, there is no way you can get around the fact there 
was trade between Mesopotamia and the Gulf and I intend
to call you on it.
steve
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Clovis: Need info about clovis in Asia
From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Date: 14 Sep 1996 23:17:27 GMT
In article <51etbe$ls1@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>, matthuse@ix.netcom.co 
says...
>
>In <51e66i$15n@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
>writes: 
>
>[snip]
>
>>Fladmark has shown that the Aleutian and Queen Charlotte islands
>>provided one of the earliest refugia extending across the northern
>>pacific to have been extensively populated by man.
>
>Steve,
>
>Aren't you overstating Fladmark just a tad???  I didn't think he had
>evidence for Paleoindians (i.e., earlier than Clovis) on Queen
>Charlotte.  I know you posted about that recent find described on the
>Sitka list, but there were still questions about that. 
>
>Regards,
>August Matthusen
Hi August,
I don't think I described Fladmark as either Paleoindian or Clovis,
just early ( The sites are c 9000 BC). In addition to their age the
Clovis sites have very clearly defined characteristics to their tools
some of which do show up in Paleoindian collections though the 
Paleoindian sites have generally less clearly defined characteristics
to their toolkits.
The point I wanted to make is that there are sites to the south of
beringa with older dates and more sophisticated tools which suggest
the migrations throughout beringa were generally of people moving 
along a southern and not a northern route.
Fladmarks refugia might have been along the line of march of such 
a maritime route.
steve
Return to Top
Subject: Re:Early Human occupation of Southern Mesopotamia:
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 20:46:22
In article <51fcbp$h5v@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) writes:
You provided a ramblisng long post which had nothing to do with the discussion 
at habd and which included the following:
>you didn't say "imported from Dilmun"
>you didn't say "imported from the Gulf"
>you didn't specify the species of wood
>you said "wood...imported from Arabia to Mari,
>as evidenced by the Mari letters..."
>and asked for "one single reference,..."
>which I provided...
>Grumble all you want to, you are busted. 
>Plain and simple...
This has gone on far too long.  You simply have not provided one citation of 
wood coming to Mari from the Gulf or Arabia as evidenced by the letters from 
that city.  I mention Dilmun since it is the only place name in that region 
that is attested in texts from Mari.  If you believe that a mention of a 
caravan receiving a small amount of aromatic wood as it is going towards the 
gulf is evicence of wood coming from the gulf then anything is possible and we 
have nothing to talk about.  You believe that, it is quite fine with me.  I am 
finished with this ludicrous discussion.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks
From: renae@saratoga (Renae Ransdorf)
Date: 15 Sep 1996 01:10:03 GMT
 Have a book here that everyone who's interested 
in this thread should take a glance at...it's 
called *Ancient Inventions*, by Peter James and 
Nick Thorpe, large trade paperback from 
Ballantine, ISBN 0-345-36476-7.  The blurb lines 
on the front cover read: "From Greek steam engines 
to Roman fire engines...Aztec chewing gum to 
Etruscan false teeth...earthquake detectors in 
China to electric batteries in Iraq...Stone Age 
brain surgery to Middle Age hand grenades...the 
Pharaohs' canals to the Cretans' lavatories..."   
RLR 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Edgar Casey--The theory of civilization not yet known to man--undiscovered
From: Jon
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 01:37:34 +0100
In article <51cq11$ag0@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>, millerwd@ix.netcom.com
writes
>In  Jon 
>writes: 
>>
>>In article <51a0rp$gj3@dfw-ixnews2.ix.netcom.com>,
>>millerwd@ix.netcom.com writes
>>>In  Jon 
>>>writes: 
>>>>
>>>>In article <51563p$oe2@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>,
>>>>matthuse@ix.netcom.com writes
>>>>>In <5153gq$41q@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com>
>>>>>millerwd@ix.netcom.com(wd&aeMiller;) writes: 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>(snip)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Never trust an archaeologist or geologist who wear a pith helmet
>>>and 
>>>>>>>safari jacket. Sounds too much like high drama to me. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ah, but gee whiz!  And to think I wanted to wear a revolver and
>>>whip,
>>>>>>and ride on little red lines all over the globe saving the world
>>>from
>>>>>>Nazis and psychopathic child slavers while finding the Ark of the
>>>>>>Covenant, the Holy Grail and really cool glowing stones that can
>get
>>>>>>real hot if you touch them.  Sigh, now I'll just have to change my
>>>>>>major.
>>>>>
>>>>Sigh, I am just an amateur, but if you get the job, I'll carry your 
>>>>bags!
>>>>-- 
>>>>Jon 
>>>
>>>
>>>CooL!!!  As long as you promise not to turn out to be a Nazi in
>>>disguise!  ;)
>>>
>>>I couldn't resist keeping this one going...hehe
>>>
>>>Amanda
>>No, I gave it up.  I don't look good in black, and I just couldn't
>>get the goose step right - gives me rotten backache! Your original
>>posting fails to mention the bull whip - don't worry I'll bring mine!
>>-- 
>>Jon 
>
>
>Okey Dokey.  As long as we can also get quite innebriated in a Cairo
>bar with a monkey in a red jacket, too.  Somehow we'll have to fit in
>karaoke for an even more bizarre expedition.  Possibly even an old man
>with a long beard named Tim.  Hurm.  :):):)
>
>Amanda
I can get innebriated anywhere - bring your own monkey and Tim -tell
him to bring the beard too.  By the way, since I'm bringing the whip
would you mind wearing the thigh length leather boots - they just 
kill me - all dat lederhosen ven they tyi to tourn me into a Nazi!!
Well, OK here is the plan.  Some very important person has sent me
a map of Atlantis, so how do we get there?
-- 
Jon 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks
From: degrafx@netwrx.net (Gilgamesh)
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 16:04:05 GMT
Doug Weller  wrote:
>In article <3224e1bb.0@news.netwrx.net>
>          degrafx@netwrx.net (Gilgamesh) wrote:
>Large monuments are popular in a number of cultures, usually
>religious or funereal. Certainly it's clear that there are a lot
>of funereal structures on the Giza plateau. 
Yes, where is the body in any of these 3 pyramids?
Where are the funeral decorations found in the real tombs of egypt.
>> Um, you ever hear of the Gentry??  you know, they abducted children
>> and woman and had under-ground kingdoms.  Why are you quick in
>> bringing up aliens and the GPOG?  Don't digress from the issue
>> of the mysteriousness of these structures.
>The 'Gentry'? Who were they? In the UK the gentry were the upper middle
>class.
In Irish folklore they are something else.  An aristocratic undeground
race.  Father Kirk wrote of their government and life style.
>Of course it can be explained why pyramids of widely differing construction
>(please don't forget that) were built all over the world. It's a basic
>shape, easy to build high.
Yeah the GPOG was easy to build.
--
UFO Video Analysis - Ovni Chapterhouse
Nellis Air Force Base Stills!!!!!!
http://www.netwrx.net/users/degrafx/ufovideo.htm
all video all the time
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Pyramids and Aliens
From: gans@scholar.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans)
Date: 15 Sep 1996 00:20:20 GMT
Matt Silberstein (matts2@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: In sci.archaeology "Ann McMeekin"  wrote:
: 
: >Hi, 
: 
: >I've just started to get this newsgroup, and I've missed the start of a
: >number of threads.  The one I'm particularly interested in is the one
: >discussing whether or not humans built the Great Pyramid, and other large
: >structures around the world.
: 
: I think it is pretty obvious that they did. I can't image humans being
: able to build something as large as the Great Pyramid. 
: 
: >I'd be grateful for any theories and information on this subject that
: >anyone can provide, along with notes of any books or videos which are
: >worth reading on the subject.
The Empire State Building in New York is another example.  It
couldn't possibly have been build with the then-extant
technology.  Further, there is ample evidence of strange 
alien things happening on and around it.  Attempts by the
U.S. Air Force to destroy it failed as well.
    ----- Paul J. Gans   [gans@scholar.chem.nyu.edu]
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Pyramids and Aliens
From: gans@scholar.nyu.edu (Paul J. Gans)
Date: 15 Sep 1996 00:23:07 GMT
William R. Belcher (wbelcher@students.wisc.edu) wrote:
: Matt:
: 
: Thank goodness - I thought that you were serious (about the post that is).
For shame.  How little we know our fellow posters.  I'll be
glad to certify Matt's sane-ness.  In fact, I suspect that
he is a member of the International Archaeological Conspiracy.
     ----- Paul J. Gans  [gans@scholar.chem.nyu.edu]
Return to Top
Subject: ARK OF COVENANT FOUND IN ISRAEL !! (???)
From: mortenm@mail.link.no (Morten Mjøsdal)
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 03:48:17 GMT
The following was posted in alt.prophecies.nostradamus.
Is there anything to this, or is it just the mindwork of some crazy
people? 
It makes you wonder!
THIS WAS NOT POSTED BY ME!
>etlmkcs@etlxdmx.ericsson.se (Markie) wrote:
>
>>This was posted here in May. Thought I'd repost it as there has been some discussion on the subject recently. 
>>I was not the original poster BTW.
>
>>Markie
>
>>#########################################################
>
>>From n/a 
>>Newsgroups: alt.prophecies.nostradamus
>>Subject: Ark of Covenant Found in Israel, What does this mean
>>Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 20:25:59 -0500
>
>>Forwarded from a friend.  Sorry, my email address is private, so please 
>>post any comments to the group.
>
>>--------------1A5F212AC1
>
>>THE PROPHETIC TELEGRAPH               No.78 January 1996
>>>From Arthur & Rosalind Eedle. Oxleigh, Langham Rd, Mumby,
>>Alford, Lincs, LN13
>>9SQ, England. (Phone/Fax: 01754 872539)
>
>
>>                         THE ARK OF THE COVENANT
>
>
>
>>          In November of last year when writing P.T.73. I closed
>>with a mention of the possible discovery of the Ark of the
>>Covenant in Jerusalem.
>
>>Since then I have had the opportunity of following this up, and
>>have found what seems to be conclusive evidence. My earlier
>>account contained some errors, for example, I had assumed that it
>>was Jonathan Gray who made the discovery whereas in fact it was
>>Ron Wyatt. from Nashville, Tennessee. I would like to apologise
>>for this error, due to the scanty information available to me
>>just two months ago. And now, in this number of the Telegraph, I
>>should like to share the facts as revealed in an address given by
>>Jonathan Gray in a London church on Saturday 7th October 1995. a
>>Video of which we have now seen, and also an address given by Ron
>>Wyatt in Nashville.
>
>>          What had totally escaped my notice was the date. The
>>Ark was found on 6th January 1982. exactly 14 years ago, but was
>>kept secret by request of the Israeli Government. Although I
>>cannot claim to have all the "inside information", I have
>>gathered that permission has recently been granted to advertise
>>the find, though not the exact location, and that this year is
>>likely to be the time for the Ark. and its precious content (the
>>two tablets of the law) to be made known to the world.
>
>>          Before beginning the amazIng story of this discovery, I
>>must say that the whole episode has been compassed about by
>>miracle. God has set His seal upon this most holy artifact of the
>>past, and shown that it has some great significance for the days
>>just ahead, whether in fact or in type. And the impact that it
>>will have on world Jewry can hardly be estImated.
>
>>          The story begins in 1978, when Ron Wyatt was swimming
>>in the sea At Ashkelon, one of the ancient cities of the
>>Philistines. He stubbed his toe on something, and found that it
>>was the rim of a large pot. Further investigation revealed that
>>it was a Canaanite burial pot, the like of which archaeologist
>>had long been searching for but had hitherto not found. When this
>>news was brought to the Director of Antiquities in Jerusalem, he
>>was delighted, and the event, seemingly by "accident", proved to
>>be the means of cementing a relationship which was to serve a
>>greater purpose later.
>
>
>
>>          A short while afterwards, Ron was standing talking to
>>the Director of Antiquities, facing the cliff known as Golgotha,
>>or Calvary. (These words both meaning place of skull are
>>respectively Hebrew and Latin.) Suddenly Ron found his arm
>>shooting out, and he pointed, saying "There's Jeremiah's Grotto
>>- that rubbish heap - the Ark of the Covenant must be in there!"
>>The Director answered spontaneously, "Then you must find It." 
>>But Ron was surprised at himself. He had no thought in his mind
>>about the Ark, and couldn't understand why he had made the
>>remark. This was miracle number one. and the Director's
>>enthusiastic response and request for him to find the Ark was
>>miracle number two - a most unlikely offer, seeing it was given
>>to a foreigner, and that it Concerned THE most holy, sought-after
>>artifact in the Jewish world.
>
>>          However, Ron needed to get back to the States, and so a
>>whole year went by before he returned with two others, to begin
>>the dig. Meeting again with the Director. he learned that the
>>site was jointly owned by an Arab and a European. Both needed to
>>give permission to excavate the site. Most surprisingly, BOTH
>>gave that permission without even asking what they were looking
>>for! This was miracle number three.
>
>>          And so in that year, 1979, the arduous slow job of
>>removing tons of accumulated rubbish began. Their dig was more or
>>less in front of the "Skull", and quite near to Gordon's tomb.
>>Beginning at the top of the pile, they painstakingly removed load
>>after load of rubbish, and eventually came upon a ledge in which
>>they found three post-holes hacked out of the rock.  Each of
>>these holes was about 13 inches square in shape, and some three
>>feet deep. Furthermore. each hole had a "plug" in the top, which
>>contained finger holes for easy removal. It was quite obvious
>>what they had found. It was the site of the crucifixions, the
>>wooden stakes being lowered into these post holes, which would
>>later be plugged until needed again.
>
>>          Behind the post holes was the cliff face, and at a
>>height of about 12 feet, there were ledges cut into the rock, on
>>which could be set the details of the crimes committed by those
>>who were crucified. The middle one was clearly the most
>>significant, and was reserved for the worst criminal. We read
>>that Pilate ordered them to write "This is Jesus of Nazareth, the
>>King of the Jews" a statement which greatly angered Caiaphas and
>>the Sanhedrin, but they had no authority to change it.
>
>>          Amongst the rubbish they found several Coins, none of
>>which was later than A.D. 130, and this showed that the site was
>>afterwards covered up and disused. This date fits in well with
>>history, because the final destruction of Jerusalem came after
>>the Bar-Cochba revolt in A.D.132-135.
>
>>          Further excavation at this level revealed the remains
>>of a building measuring 40 feet out from the cliff-face, and 22
>>feet wide, that had at one time been constructed over the central
>>post hole. This was thought to be a chapel used by early
>>Christians, who venerated the site of the master's great
>>sacrifice. This idea was given further impetus by the discovery
>>of a huge circular stone on the floor of this building, Quite
>>near to the post hole.  The stone measured 13 feet 2 inches in
>>diameter, and about nine inches thick. It was known that stones
>>of this sort were used to roll in front of sepuchral caves. But
>>this one was huge!
>
>>          Investigation was made at the entrance to the cave
>>known as "Gordon's tomb". which was discovered in 1882 by General
>>Gordon on his way home from his historic Chinese campaign. He was
>>not satisfied with the traditional site of the crucifixion, the
>>Church of the Holy Sepulchre. founded by Queen Helena, mother of
>>Constantine the Great, because it was WITHIN the city walls, and
>>could not therefore Qualify as being the site according to
>>Scripture. But the "place of the skull" was just outside the
>>Damascus Gate. and by the highway that led to Samaria, and
>>therefore mat all the conditions. Searching led him to the
>>discovery of the actual site of Jesus' burial. 
>
>>          As I said. investigation was made at the entrance to
>>this tomb, and in the wall ware found two holes, exactly 13 feet
>>2 inches apart, in which metal rods were originally inserted to
>>act as a "seal" to the tomb. The metal rod on the right. as you
>>face the tomb, was missing, but the one on the left was still in
>>place, showing all the signs of having been sheared off by some
>>mighty force.
>
>>          Here was clear evidence that the huge stone found above
>>in the chapel, was indeed the stone used to cover the entrance to
>>Jesus' tomb. It was a mighty stone, as the Scriptures declare,
>>and one that would have taken many men to roll back, up the
>>slope. to the left of the tomb. But whoever moved the stone. did
>>so WITHOUT removing the two-inch-thick metal rod. In other words,
>>it was the work of the Angel, who, we are told, "rolled back the
>>stone". Incidentally, the stone could not have been rolled to the
>>right because a stone block had been built into the gully,
>>presumably to arrest the movement of the stone as it was rolled
>>into position. (Incidentally, quite recently the tomb of Herod
>>the Great has been found in Jerusalem, and the stone measured
>>just four and a half feet in diameter. Exactly one third the
>>diameter of the huge stone that Joseph of Arimathea had made for
>>his sepulchre.) 
>
>>          Thus far in the dig, conclusive evidence had been
>>obtained that this was the true site of the crucifixion, and that
>>the early church had built a chapel of remembrance over the post
>>hold and the great stone. It had already been known that Skull
>>Hill was the traditional site for burials, Moslem, Jewish, and
>>Christian. and that in antiquity it was the place where criminals
>>were stoned to death. (In the Mishna it is called "Beth
>>ha-Sekelah", literally "House of Stoning") It was here that
>>Stephen was stoned. Also it was the recognised place of public
>>execution for Jewish criminals. As late as the beginning of the
>>20th century Jews would spit at the hill, throw stones, and curse
>>the "destroyer of their nation." All this is clear evidence that
>>it was the true scene of Christ's crucifixion and burial.
>
>>          But further investigation showed another important
>>fact. Inside the middle post-hole, the one which was used to hold
>>the Cross of Jesus, they found a crack on the left side. leading
>>down into the rock. Here was the evidence of the earthquake that
>>occurred the moment that Jesus died. This finding was of supreme
>>importance. but was not appreciated until much later.  
>
>>          The excavators had not as yet found the entrance to an
>>y cave that might house the Ark. The work was exhausting and
>>slow, as lorry-load after lorry-load of rubbish was carted away.
>>Two years went by, and the three men ware getting weary and
>>somewhat discouraged. By this time they were digging a narrow
>>trench against the rock face, and there was only room for one man
>>to work there at a time. And so they would take it in turns,
>>whilst the other two would take a rest on the ground above.
>
>>          Suddenly one day, when Ron Wyatt was digging at the
>>bottom of the trench, he looked up and standing there above him
>>was a very tall man dressed in typical flowing Arabic garments.
>
>>          "God bless you, Ron Wyatt, for what you are doing."
>
>>          "Who are you? How did you know what we are doing?" 
>
>>          "I know it all. " 
>
>>          "D'you live round here?" 
>
>>          "No I don't." 
>
>>          "How d'you know my name? where d'you come from?" 
>
>>          "I've Just come from South Africa, and I'm on my way to 
>>           the New Jerusalem. God bless you." 
>
>>          Ron jumped up as the man walked away. Reaching the top  
>>          of the trench he asked the other two which way the man  
>>          went. They said that they hadn't seen anyone. It was    
>>          then that Ron realised an Angel had been sent to
>>          give them encouragement,to spur them on. This was       
>>          miracle number four.
>
>>          With  renewed  enthusiasm,  they hacked away until they 
>>reached  a point where there were signs of a cave entrance.  It
>>was January 1982, and four years from when Ron exclaimed to the
>>Director about Jeremiah's rubbish heap. Hastily they broke
>>through into a cave, but the hole was too small for any of them
>>to crawl through. Giving a torch to a small boy, the son of the
>>Arab who was joint-owner of the land, he climbed through. but
>>shot out again very rapidly, looking as white as a ghost.
>
>>          "What's in there? What's in there?" he exclaimed, and
>>since then has refused to tell anyone what ha saw.
>
>>          The hole was enlarged until it was of sufficient size
>>to allow Ron to crawl through. It was 2 p.m. on January 6th. Ron
>>found himself in a large chamber measuring 22 feet from the
>>entrance to the back wall, 14 feet. wide and about. 8 feet from
>>floor to roof. There before him were sacred items of furniture
>>from Solomon's Temple, the Altar of Burnt offering, the Table of
>>Showbread, and the Altar of Incense. They were covered over with
>>skins, over which were placed lengths of timber, and on top of
>>these were lumps of rock and stone.
>
>>          But Ron became aware that at the back of the cave there
>>was something else, and it had been enclosed within a wall, so
>>that only the top of it could be seen. As his eyes became
>>accustomed to the dim light. so he realised that he was looking
>>at two Cherubim with wings outstretched over the Mercy Seat. It
>>was the Ark of the Covenant! Ron collapsed and fainted, and
>>was unconscious for 45 minutes. Coming to, he crawled out and
>>announced his discovery. The Director of Antiquities was
>>informed, and he hurried to the site, and began to enter the
>>cave, but on doing so his back collapsed and he had to be taken
>>to hospital where he remained paralysed for nearly two weeks.
>>He was later heard to say that he would never again try to enter
>>the Cave and see the Ark. This was miracle number five.
>
>>          Ron took a Polaroid camera into the cave and
>>photographed the Ark.
>
>>On immediate development,  the film was found to be fogged, not
>>entirely but just over the portion where the Ark was. He then
>>tried using his 35 mm camera, and when these shots came out they
>>likewise showed fogging. Then a Video camera was used and the
>>same effect was apparent. Some strange thing was happening to
>>prevent the world from seeing the Ark. This was miracle number
>>six. I have now seen the footage of this video, and all is clear 
>>except where the Ark rests, and in front of it there is a golden
>>mist. Ron has pencilled in the outline of what he saw and the
>>Cherubim are of human form with wings outspread over the Ark.
>
>>          At this stage, a Jewish official suddenly decided to
>>halt all further work on the site. It was a severe blow, and Ron
>>and his friends prayed that God might over-rule. The prayer was
>>answered almost immediately, because the man had a heart attack
>>and died. This was miracle number seven.
>
>>          Another man showed great curiosity and interest in what
>>was going on, and tried to prise out of Ron what he was doing and
>>where he was working, but Ron refused to divulge any information.
>>However, this man was determined, and followed the party about
>>surrepticiously until he finally saw what they
>
>>were doing. Calling a press conference for 9 am the next morning,
>>he prepared himself to blast their secret into the open. But the
>>following morning at 8am he was found dead in an alley way. in a
>>pool of blood, having been shot by the PLO on some unrelated
>>matter. This was miracle number eight.
>
>>          When the Jewish Authorities were told about this find,
>>they were put in a very difficult position. They had living
>>within the land religious extremists who would stop at nothing if
>>they could but see the Ark, and know that it was genuine. already
>>there had been attempts to blow up the Dome of the Rock, the
>>Arabic sacred site which rests over the place where Abraham was
>>to sacrifice his son Isaac. This mosque rests on the Temple
>>platform, and many Jews would do anything to get it removed, so
>>that they could build a new Temple on the site. The discovery of
>>the Ark would be the greatest single event to spur them on at all
>>costs, but would engulf the Middle East in a "holy war" of
>>unimaginable horror and devastation.
>
>>          The result was that the Israeli Parliament has asked
>>Ron to build a door to the cave, cover it with earth, and plant
>>shrubs to disguise the site. And there it has remained for the
>>last fourteen years. I have no idea what the Israelis have in
>>mind for this Year, but if they decide to make the Ark Public,
>>then I am led to wonder what will happen. Will the Lord allow it?
>>The strange happenings thus far indicate that God is still very
>>interested in the preservation of His holy furniture.
>
>>          But although we have come this far, the story does not
>>end here. I mentioned earlier that there was a crack in the rock
>>on the left side of the middle post-hole, a crack that had been
>>caused by an earthquake. It was only when Ron Wyatt investigated
>>the ark of the Covenant in more detail that ha realised what he
>>was looking at. Right above the left hand side of the Mercy
>>Seat the roof of the chamber shows a large fissure, and within
>>this fissure there are copious quantities of dried human blood.
>>Furthermore, on the Mercy Seat itself there is a large amount of
>>dried blood. When measurements were taken, they found that the
>>crack in the post-hole led down to the fissure below, and so it
>>was possible for blood to trickle through.
>
>>          It will be remembered that AFTER Jesus had died, and
>>the earthquake rent the rocks, a Roman soldier pierced the Lord's
>>side with a spear. Presumably the spear entered the Lord's heart
>>or spleen, because "blood and water" flowed out. The Lord had
>>died of a broken heart, crushed by the agony of carrying the load
>>of this  world's sin. His death had not been the normal death of
>>one who had been crucified. The two thieves had their legs broken
>>to accelerate death, necessary to comply with Jewish legislation,
>>that no man should remain there on the Sabbath, which was due to
>>begin at about 6 pm that day.
>
>>          And so it was that God the Father had rent the rocks to
>>make a way for His Son's blood to flow down from the spear-wound,
>>through the newly formed fissure onto the very Mercy Seat itself.
>>Now just think about this for a moment. Jeremiah had deposited
>>the Ark in the cave some six centuries B.C., with absolutely no
>>knowledge of the events which were to occur on Good Friday. The
>>Romans who hacked out the post-holes had absolutely no knowledge
>>of what lay beneath their feet, nor that they were positioning
>>the CENTRAL hole in exactly the right place. And until the Lord
>>had died, there was no way for blood to trickle down because
>>there was no crack. But these Amazing coincidences actually
>>happened. Yes, they ARE coincidences,  because everything had to
>>COINCIDE exactly for it to happen, but there was never any human
>>design - it was entirely the work of God in Heaven, who knew the
>>end from the beginning, and arranged for it to happen in that
>>way. This is miracle number nine, and it is a "miracle of
>>miracles." In Hebrews we read. "It is not possible for the blood
>>of bulls and goats to take away sin, - - but Thou hast prepared a
>>body for me - - and lo, I come to do Thy will O God." "By His own
>>blood He entered in once and for all into the Holy Place having
>>obtained eternal redemption for us." (10:4-7 and 9:12) .
>
>>          None of the O.T. sacrifices were able to take away sin.
>>Only the blood of the Son of God could do that. But the children
>>of Israel were accepted as a result of their sacrifices by virtue
>>of faith in the spoken word of God, and the sacrificial laws.
>>Because Jesus was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world
>>in God's foreknowledge. He was able to accept the sacrifices of
>>His people BEFORE Christ came into the world. Calvary was the Hub
>>of History. They looked forward. We look back. Each acts in
>>faith, the one in prospect. the other in remembrance.
>
>>          Before Ron closed the cave, he took some of the dried
>>blood that had been kept undisturbed for nearly 2000 years and
>>presented it to a laboratory for testing. Using an electron
>>microscope it was possible to find the chromosomal content of the
>>blood. Ron described it in his address at Nashville, saying that
>>normal human blood contains 46 chromosomes, 23 from each parent.
>>X chromosomes are female, and Y chromosomes are male. All 23
>>ware present from the mother, but ONLY ONE chromosome was
>>present, the Y chromosome. showing that the blood belonged to a
>>male, but that HE HAD NO HUMAN FATHER. This is miracle number
>>ten. The Lord had preserved the blood until man had the
>>technological means of determining the chromosomal content
>>of the blood, thereby to prove that the Virgin birth was no myth,
>>but VERY FACT.
>
>>          These are the ten miracles connected with the discovery
>>of the Ark of the Covenant. There may be others that I have
>>missed, I don't know. But surely enough has been given to provide
>>us all with such an amazing extra proof of our Lord's sacrifice
>>and what it means, that all evangelism must change into top gear.
>>I pray that this little paper may become a useful tool to use in
>>this respect. Please feel free to copy it if you wish. There is
>>never any copyright on any of our papers. We only ask that
>>COMPLETE copies be made, so that ambiguities do not arise.
>
>
>>          I should now like to share another item of news in
>
>>connection with the above scenario. I have a valued friend and
>>brother in Christ who is a retired Doctor of Medicine. In an
>>excited telephone conversation with me a
>>short while ago he said that Ron Wyatt's testimony about the
>>chromosomes had caused him to question whether it would be
>>possible for anyone to have blood so depleted in chromosomal
>>content. Being a man of faith and action, he committed this to
>>the Lord, asking for a clear sign that all was well.
>
>>          Not many days passed before he picked up the New
>>Scientist for 7th October 1995,  and there on page 16 he found
>>the following heading - THE BOY WHOSE BLOOD HAS NO FATHER
>
>>He could hardly believe his eyes! The author, Philip Cohen,
>>quoting an article by David Bonthron and his colleagues at
>>Edinburgh university in Nature Genetic (Volume 11, page 164)
>>explained that a certain three year-old boy had bean found whose
>>white blood cells contain only two X Chromosomes, the signal for
>>a female. To cut a long story short, they went on to explain
>>that the probable cause was a self-activating unfertilised ovum
>>which had subsequently (after a short time) become fertilised in
>>the normal way. The sperm would then have entered only a PART of
>>the divided ovum, thereby creating this most unusual affect.
>>Bonthron believed that the boy's remarkable genetics depended on
>>a number of highly unusual circumstances combining together, and
>>occurring within a very short time window. "I don't expect we'll
>>ever see another one. " he said. 
>
>>         Here was yet another miracle! Our Doctor friend had been
>>given information about an incredibly rare condition, yes, but
>>the TIMING of the article in New Scientist was a true gift from
>>God. The little boy's chromosomes do not match those of our Lord,
>>but present what Cohen called "partial parthenogenesis",
>>(parthenogenesis is the biologist's name for Virgin Birth.)
>>however, the s milarity was such that it proved the
>>possibility of a human being existing with a considerable
>>depletion in his chromosomal count .
>
>>          And finally. what about those other reported cases of
>>the finding of the Ark of the Covenant? I have left this until
>>last so as not to spoil the TRUE story by preluding it with the
>>spurious. 
>
>>          I find it interesting, Almost intriguing, to realise
>>that Steven Spielberg's film "Raiders of the Lost Ark" should
>>have come out for general release in 1981. I remember watching it
>>at the time, and wondered what he was trying to say, being of
>>Jewish origin. The supernatural affects he attributed to the
>>holiness of the Ark certainly had their parallel in the finding
>>of the real Ark.
>
>>          But late in that very year, an announcement was made by
>>another team, saying that they had located the Ark in a cave in
>>Mount Nebo, the mountain where Moses viewed the Promised Land
>>before his death. This team included Tom Crotser, Jim Bollinger,
>>and the astronaut Jim Irwin. Irwin had earlier been interviewed
>>on BBC Television by Richard  Baker. who asked him, "What are you
>>doing now?" And amongst other things he said. "I'm helping to
>>find the Ark of the Covenant in Jordan." But it was in the
>>Christmas 1981 issue of Far Eastern Berean that a panelled
>>quotation appeared, taken from the Straits Times of Singapor,.
>>entitled "We found the lost Ark claim!"
>
>>          And so, on BBC 1 in January 1982 (at the very time when
>>Ron Wyatt was breaking through into the cave) Tom Crotser was
>>interviewed, and he showed photographs of the Ark. Furthermore
>>there was a guarded note to this effect in the Jerusalem Post.
>>Now we may very well ask why Crotser was able to obtain clear
>>photographs, whereas Wyatt was not. And I shall leave it to my
>>readers to ponder that question. Incidentally, I have not
>>personally heard anything more about this find in Mount Nebo,
>>except that it is sited in a position belonging to both the
>>Vatican and the Jordanian government, the latter being adamant in
>>refusing anyone to remove the artifact. 
>
>>          An American archaeologist by the name of David Lutz
>>made the following statement.
>
>>          "One rabbi told me this discovery would not only
>>promote the building of the Temple on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem,
>>but would also signal the end of the Diaspora, the dispersion of
>>the Jewish people. It would be as influential as a spoken
>>command from the Almighty to all Jewish parsons to coma home to
>>the Promised Land. To Christians it would be a clear signal
>>that we are nearing the end or this age and the beginning of the
>>Messianic Kingdom." 
>
>>          No wonder there is great excitement Amongst many
>>people, whether they be Jews or Christians. One wonders why the
>>timing of the event on God's calendar is just now. Are we
>>entering the "crossroads of history"? And if so, then we shall
>>need to know which route to take. I am in no position to Say
>
>>whether the Israeli government will make a move just now. but the
>>facts are already out And being advertised quite widely, and this
>>in itself is creating quite a stir. It is doing to us what the
>>Angel did to Ron wyatt - spur us on with greater vigour than ever
>>before to be ready for the Lord's return. 
>
>>          Many people have drawn up plans from prophecy. some say
>>that much still needs to be done before the second coming, but in
>>doing so they destroy the urgency of our Lord's words, "Watch and
>>pray for you know. not the day or the hour - and again I say,
>>watch." The interpretation of prophecy, particularly in the
>>Christian dispensation, has never been an easy task, and we may
>>very well be depriving ourselves of the very thing we need to
>>"trim our lamps" and make ourselves ready. Who knows? We are
>>living in days of electrifying excitement spiritually, and it
>>behoves us to "love His appearing" , and "purify ourselves, even
>>as He is pure".
>
>>          So what is the artifact in Mount Nebo? I do not accuse
>>Crotser lying. He certainly found something. But what is it? My
>>guess is that it is a REPLICA of the true Ark, made in Jeremiah's
>>day, and deposited in the cave according to the words that are
>>found in 2 Maccabees 2:4-8. Why should Jeremiah do this? Because
>>he was a man of great integrity and honour towards the Lord, and
>>he lived Amongst people, even his OWN people, who were dishonest
>>to the Core. They would be watching his every move, and wanting
>>to know what he was doing. This would mean that SOMEONE would
>>find the Ark and raid it. and he didn't want that to happen. So
>>he made a replica, and took it to Mount Nebo. In the event, even
>>this replica has not been found until recent days.
>
>>          There is yet another story about the Ark which needs a
>>mention  before I conclude this paper. In 1992 Graham Hancock
>>wrote a book, published by William Heinemann, entitled "The Sign
>>and the Seal". It is the account of his travels in Ethiopia in
>>search of the Ark, which by tradition is held in great secrecy by
>>a people who have a strange mixture of Judaism and ChristianIty.
>>Hancock was never able to gain access to the building where this
>>Ark is kept, and which is closely guarded by a monk by the name
>>of Abba Fameray. 
>
>>          The story goes that King Solomon sired a son by the
>>Queen of Sheba, whose name was menelech and when Menelech was in
>>his late teens he travelled to Jerusalem, and was treated very
>>well by Solomon, who asked what gift he would like to take back
>>with him. "The Ark of the Covenant", he said, which prompted an
>>immediate negative response of course. Menelech was not well
>>pleased with this refusal, and later brought several companions
>>with him, and stole the Ark in the dead of night, and transported
>>it to Ethiopia, where it has rested until this very day. This
>>story may be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica and it adds
>>that the Ark now rests in a town called Axum. This is a highly
>>unlikely tale, and would have been a major embarrassment to the
>>children of Israel if they found that it had been stolen. No
>>doubt a "holy war" would Have been raised by Solomon to regain
>>this priceless treasure. But no. There is no mention of it
>>anywhere else. save in Ethiopia.
>
>>          So what do THEY have in that land, which they guard so
>>carefully? I believe it could be yet another replica, not taken
>>in Solomon's day, but probably in Jeremiah's day or thereabouts.
>
>
>
>>          Finally, a few addresses for those who would like to
>>write,   
>
>>(a) to Jonathan Gray. at P.O.Box 3370,  Rundle Mall, Adelaide,
>>South Australia. 5000.
>
>>(b) to Ron Wyatt. at Wyatt Archaeological Research, 713, Lambert
>>Drive,  Nashville, Tennessee, U.S.A. 37220 
>
>>(c) to the British H.Q. of Advent Truth, at P.O.Box 41, Derby,
>>DE1 9ZR, England,  from whom the Various Videos. tapes,  and
>>books may be obtained.
>
>
>
>
Morten.
Return to Top
Subject: Early Scripts and "Tokens"
From: VCBROWN@delphi.com
Date: 15 Sep 1996 05:07:45 GMT
Henry and all,
	You can find a fair critique of Schmandt-Besserat's theory 
in the American Journal of Archaeology (AJA 84, 339-358). The article
is "Of Clay Pebbles, Hollow Clay Balls, and Writing: a Sumerian View"
and it is written by Stephen Lieberman.
	Lieberman concludes that the hypothesis is unjustified on
"chronological and geographical grounds, imprecise or incorrect in 
terms of many of the purely formal comparisons which have been made,
inadequate as an explanation of the appearance of writing, and based
on an error in classification."
Virgil Brown
Return to Top

Downloaded by WWW Programs
Byron Palmer