Newsgroup sci.archaeology 46618

Directory

In article , 
inisglas@inisglas.seanet.com says...
>
>In article <516l61$iq@lince.lander.es> David  writes:
>
>
>>Somebody know something about a neanderthal's diet study (with analisys of
>>bones)
>
>I believe that Eric Trinkhaus would have that information, if anyone would. I 
>suggest a literature search. Trinkhaus is the man when it comes to 
>Neanderthals. 
>
I couldn't find anything by Trinkaus but you could try:
Lieberman, D. (1993) The rise and fall of seasonal mobility among 
hunter-gathers: The case of the Southern Levant. Current Anthropology. 34. 
599-631. 
For general palaeodiet try:
Schwarcz, H.P. (1991) Some theoretical aspects of isotope paleodiet studies. 
Journal of Archaeological Science. 18 (3). 261-76.
If I'm not mistaken the whole of this edition of the JAS is on palaeodiet.
I'd be interested in anything more specific.
	Dan.

In response to all the speculations about the building of the pyramids, a
few points. As Stella pointed out, there are the earlier pyramids starting
with Djoser's to show the learning experience in handling large blocks
confidently. Secondly, to all the speculations about rolling blocks, not
only is this not feasable with a squared block, but as the film, This Old
Pyramid showed, it is an utter flop. The method that did work was loading
the blocks onto a sledge, and moving them up a ramp. What is more, the
ancient Egyptians' own depiction show that sledges were used consistently
to move masses from small statues (tomb of Princess Idut scene) to large
colossal statues (Deir el-Bersheh painting, of colossus being moved). The
secret was pouring liquid (water probably) on the track. The tafla clay
used to surface the ramps at Giza becomes very slick when wetted, and
that made moving the blocks much easier, again, as the video, This Old
Pyramid demonstrated. As for the ramps winding around the pyramid, the
Meidum Pyramid clearly shows that the casing was dressed to a fine polish
from the top downward! So, no problem with anchoring the winding ramps
onto the rough finished blocks. 
Visit the monuments, look at the evidence, see what the ancient Egyptians
portrayed on their monuments, and then consider what their building
techniques were. Fortunately, they left enough unfinished buildings that
illustrate the methods used in adding the final finish, and other details
as well. Mindless speculation about aliens, fantastic techniques of moving
stones, etc., only clutter up the issue. Again thanks Stella, for keeping
the faith in light of all these speculative and ridiculous posts.
Sincerely,
Frank J. Yurco
University of Chicago
-- 
Frank Joseph Yurco                           fjyurco@midway.uchicago.edu

In article <0000204f+0000450a@msn.com>, PALEOMAN@msn.com says...
>
>I'm interested in all opinions on the idea that archaeology majors 
>should be required to take at least a minor in geology or that the 
>archaeology degree become a degree of science rather than art.
At the University of Liverpool under the banner heading of the School of 
Archaeology, Classics and Oriental Studies (SACOS) both options are offered. 
With the possibility of swapping between e.g. from a B.A. to an M.Sc. - it really 
just depends on the work being done.
>My girlfriend loves archaeology and is a undergrad in the field a 
>semester from receiving her degree.  She decided to take geology as a 
>minor because she loves that too and found it so related and 
>necessary that she becam a double major.  As a geology major 
>eventually emphasising in seds, morphology and 
>paleoclimates/environments I would like to work with Archaeologists 
>but I am wondering, do archaeologists really fued with geologists?
I am a geologist that came to Liverpool to do an MSc in Archaeological Science 
(I am uranium-series dating an AMH site in the Czech Republic). I hope to start 
my PhD soon. I see no incompatibility between the two disciplines and my 
supervisor (who was once with the Canadian Geological Survey) runs a 
Geoarchaeology course which covers caves, sedimentation, loess deposition, 
stratigraphy, palynology, surveying techniques, rifting, etc. In Chronological 
Studies covers K/Ar, Ar/Ar, TL, U-S, ESR, PM all of which have been used in a 
geological context initially. These courses are also available to students at the 
Earth Science Dept.
SACOS also have a section in the Physics Dept. for PM studies.
To answer get back to the point it is very difficult to see where geology ends and 
archaeology begins and this can prove fruitful in our quest for knowledge.
	Dan.

> ***next time Ann, come in fighting from the start,
>    then you wont get punched out so quick.
>    This is after all a meeting ground for high intellects of
>    university and international author status, and they *DONT* like
>    "simple questions" one little bit :)                   kaman.
I had thought to come in politely, since courtesy costs nothing, but I
suppose such a simple question was obviously demeaning to such a group and
too far below the collective dignity to be bothered with.
-- 
Ann McMeekin
am@rtel.co.uk
100702.75@compuserve.com
Section Leader for Mystic Places on Compuserve's Mysteries Forum
GO MYSTERIES

In article <323CC2CE.78CA@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>,
j&dhatch;   wrote:
>I am looking for information on the eruption of Santorini/Thera - 
>specifically dates.
 1650 BC, +- 50 yrs, based on "corrected" radiocarbon dating (corrected 
 by comparison to tree-ring dates). Estimated tephra volume 10^10 cubic
 meters, Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 6. (VEI is a sort of
 Richter scale for volcanic eruptions. St Helens 1980 had a VEI of just
 barely 5,  Krakatau 1883 and Pinatubo 1991 had VEI=6. VEI=7 events
 are extremely rare; examples are Tambora in 1815 and Mazama (Crater
 Lake in Oregon) in about 5000 B.C. Since VEI is a logarithmic
 scale, statements I have seen to the effect that Thera/Santorini
 was ~4 times as powerful as Krakatau are not inconsistent with
 the fact that both eruptions are assigned VEI=6.
 From the Smithsonian catalog, _Volcanoes of the World_, 2nd Edition,
 by Tom Simkin and Lee Siebert, Geoscience Press 1994.

In article  "Alan M. Dunsmuir"  writes:
>
>Best & Woudhuizen is a totally unconvincing fantasy.
I second that emotion!

billb@mousa.demon.co.uk (Bill Bedford) writes:
> Mike/Damon or Peni R. Griffin  wrote:
> >  For what it's worth:
> > have stayed for some time with a band of Eskimos who recognized the
> > name of Christ, some of whom had beards, whose chief he called Herard.
> > Though the physical culture he described sounds authentic enough, the
> > band refused to practice female infanticide (as, according to Roth,
> > was commonly done by Eskimos at that time), resulting in an imbalance
> > in the sexes, since the death-rate for men in t
> We know that infanticide by exposure was practiced in Iceland so there
> is no reason to supose it was not practiced in Greenland.
We do? What's the citation on that.
I'm aware of classical references to infanticide, but
all the ones I recall are in the context of condemning it,
typically as a "desperate (single or illegitimate) mother
kills baby by exposure - and is then haunted by the baby's
ghost to suicide" -  which suggest the practise was known
but not encouraged.

A new expose' detailing the oftentimes tragic story of the Mansoor Amarna
Collection. Access  http://www.amarna.com   to order your copy

Yuri,
Reading is something you need to learn.  I SAID the Polynesians were
in the Eastern Pacific.  Where the hell do you think Fiji is located?
I also said they were calm water sailors.
Additionally, I don't give a damn what Britannica Encyclopedia says. 
They are not a field research journal.  They also showed the wrong
head on Bronosaurus until a year ago.  Just because it's in print
doesn't make it right.
Paul
Yuri Kuchinsky  wrote in article
<51lb3u$82g@news1.io.org>...
> Paul,
> 
> Your post has numerous errors.
> 
> Paul Pettennude (tekdiver@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> 
> : One major point to consider here and one which is going to raise
a
> : great deal of further debate is the fact that nobody was building
> : major ocean going craft at the time Mesoamerican civilizations
were
> : forming. 
> 
> This is obviously incorrect. The Polynesians had ocean-going craft
at 
> least 4000 years ago. Here are exerpts from a post I posted only a
few 
> days ago:
> 
> ********
> 
> Date: 12 Sep 1996 18:12:02 GMT
> 
> Around 1200 B.C, a new wave of Polynesians, the Lapita ware
peoples, was
> settling the Western islands (Fiji, etc.). They were making a major
> expansionary push. 
> 
> Enc. Brit. (1992) has a long and useful article about Pacific
Islands (v. 
> 25). What it says is that around that time the peoples of the
Lapita ware
> culture were sufficiently advanced to engage in long ocean voyages.
> (Their heartland was in the Bismarck Archipelago, closer to New
Guinea.)
> Sophisticated water craft (most likely single hulled) was available
> around 4000 years ago. (p. 245) 
> 
> So there's nothing that would have prevented those people from
arriving
> to S. American coast (not necessarily a planned expedition).
> 
> ********
> 
> : Take a look at those Polynesian
> : craft--count the oars. 
> 
> They had very sophisticated sail-boats.
> 
> : It's a long way from Hawaii to the mainland. 
> : That's basically where the transmigration stopped.  
> 
> Hawaii had nothing to do with it at that time. They travelled among
> islands much further south.
> 
> : The Polynesians did most of their travel on
> : calm seas. 
> 
> This is one of the strangest statements I've seen for a while in
these 
> groups... The Pacific is a "calm sea"? Really, Paul...
> 
> : The ocean from their closest point of contact was mild
> : compared to the North Pacific route and much colder.  I don't
think
> : they had the clothes to survive in the North Pacific if they
wanted
> : to.
> 
> Clothes? They could build boats, but could not make clothes?
> 
> : Doesn't anybody out there read history anymore? 
> 
> I sure hope they do... and that includes you...
> 
> : This is the stuff of
> : WRITTEN records, not the realm of fantastic speculation. 
> 
> Enc. Brit. is engaging in fantastic speculations?
> 
> : Please
> : remember, first and foremost, I am an underwater archaeologist
and
> : the travel you are speculating about is something I have spent
the
> : last 30 years studying. 
> 
> So, it looks like we have here one more specialist showing himself
to be
> sadly misinformed... 
> 
> : I would love to find evidence of contact. 
> 
> There's evidence aplenty, Paul, if you only open your mind and look
at 
> it. I've posted plenty of useful bibliography here. Look at my
webpage. 
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Yuri.
> 
>             =O=    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    =O=
>   --- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku ---
>  
> I am not young enough to know everything   ===   Oscar Wilde
> 
> 

Dave Smith  wrote in article
<51ldpd$hqm@news2.ptd.net>...
> 	Amid the talk of Highlander Clan and Norman diversions on the 
> discussion of the derivation of 'Robert the Bruce', it seems to me,
glaringly 
> obvious that the name Robert, itself, is almost certainly Germanic, tied
thus 
> either to Saxon or 'Lallander' Scots, and as such, is likely not tied 
> directly to any Norse, Highlander Gaelic, or Norman French tradition, but
to 
> tradition surviving through the English Lowlanders.  Although now
'American' 
> primarily of Scottish descent, I spent the formative decades of my life
in a 
> fairly rural part of Germany, and recall an importance even now on
extended 
> family, similar to 'Clan' structure in the form of 'Stamm', such that one
> leading figure could easily be called 'the Such-And-Such' of the family 
> 'Such-and-Such' very much as was discussed.  But that still baffles me,
as 
> 'Bruce' or 'Brus' don't seem Germanic...
> 
> *shrug*
Sorry, but this is incorrect.  Robert was actually a very common Norman
name.  William the Conqueror's eldest son (who was deposed as Duke of
Normandy by Henry I) was named Robert, as just one prominent example of
many.
Michael Daunt
liz.daunt@sympatico.ca

I came across an old newspaper clipping from the Los Aneles Times dated MArch
6, 1924. The headline reads: OLD SCRIPTS UNCOVERED. The story tells of some
20,000 or so perfectly preserved ancient manuscripts found in Chinese
Turkestan. Some of the scripts are in 'previously unknown languages' and some
are even in Hebrew.
This is curious to me as I have not, in modern times, seen any translation of
these manuscripts which dealt mainly with Bhuddist philosophy. They were found
by an English French team headed up by a French Prof. Paul Pelliot.
Does anyone know what happen to these scripts, and the painted caves they were
found in?

Does anyone have any good references for her?
Thank you
Murrough

    > Would it be fair to say that the Greeks took over or ruled - directly or
    > otherwise - Egypt from about 332 BC to 30BC (Not sure on the end date)? 
    > 
    > Mark Hunter
    > mhunter@morgan.ucs.mun.ca
    > 
Yes it would be fair to say so.  Cleopatra VII's suicide followed Mark Antony's, having been defeated by 
Octvaius Caesar who became Augustus Caesar, marked the end of Ptolemaic rule.   It's all in 
Shakespeare's "Antony & Cleopatra"!  The end date was probably about 30 BC.
----
Keith Grenville
Cape Town, South Africa

No hay nadie que hable espaņol y este interesado en la arqueologia ?
salado@arrakis.es

Mike Yates wrote:
> 
> In an article dated Tue, 17 Sep 1996 03:35:34, Greg Reeder
>  writes
> >Some of my sources believe it is an internet fraud. What do you
> >all think?
> Fraud or not, it made the main national TV news here in UK. It was said to
> have been discovered several decades ago by an Egyptian who promptly
> bought the land and built his house over it. They did not say if this was to
> protect it or to plunder it or why it has now come into the news.
> --
> Mike Yates         Frome   Somerset   England
That's a good one--find a tomb and simply build a house over it, thereby 
hiding it from view, and get yourself a "bargain basement" (sorry, an 
Americanism) while you're at it!  What I'm trying to say is--one can 
have a jumble sale, then, whenever one wants from the "cellar".  If 
one's cellar has occupants, one merely keeps "mum" about it.  This 
fellow who built the house, his name didn't happen to be Rassoul by any 
chance?

I have a little book called the "Dwellers On the Nile" by Sir E. A. 
Wallis Budge, now a bit dated, but nevertheless full of useful 
information about life in ancient Egypt.  Paging through it today, I 
came upon something I hadn't picked up on before and it rather shocked 
me:
"So convinced were the primitive Egyptians that every man, living or 
dead, should posses a wife and concubines that, on the death of a man of 
wealth and importance, several women were killed in order that their 
spirits might go to the Other World and minister to his wants there as 
their bodies had served him in this world.  The bodies of some women who 
were murdered for this purpose at the death or burial of Amenhotep II, 
about 1448 B.C., may be seen lying on the ground near his sarcophagus, 
in his tomb at Thebes, to this day."
Surely not!  I realize that the tomb of Amenhotep II had many 
occupants--relatives, assorted persons identified and otherwise, about 
17, I think--but I have never read that there were women strewn about 
just in case the pharaoh might rouse himself sufficiently for a little 
hanky-panky.  ("Sorry, dear, I am simply DEAD!" would be a reasonable 
excuse under the circumstances, and it is difficult to have a headache 
once the brain has been removed.)
I have always thought Amenhotep II rather a cruel despot after his 
treatment of the seven foreign princes, but this is the first reference 
I have ever seen to human sacrifice among the dynastic Egyptians.  Does 
anyone know if there can be any truth to this or was Budge's imagination 
just working overtime?

>Randal Allison (rallison@mail.myriad.net) wrote:
   (snip) . . .
corn, *Zea mays*, a much more highly prized commodity, and the cornerstone
of the diet for vast numbers of Native Americans, including the peoples of
the circum-Caribbean region? Is there evidence of this status crop being
introduced into the Pacific at roughly the same time?
Regards,
Randal Allison, Ph.D.
   ---Never use a big word when a diminutive alternative will suffice---
Brace yourselves, it looks like we're in for another round of corn in
India.  The marvelous thing about this discussion is that it's like
_Finnegan's Wake_ it doesn't really matter where you come in or drop
out.  Or as Joplin (Janis, not Scott) said, "It's all the same damn
train."  Despite the deja-lu aspect of the whole thing, occasionally
some new interesting information emerges -- like that bit about the
Olmec celt showing up with a Cuban brujo.  I wonder.  Seems like one
of the Barbachano's shipped some "rebel" Maya to Cuba as sugarcane
workers, while he was governor.  I'll have to look back into Reed's
_History of the Caste War_.  Post contact transmission seems most
likely, but . . .                      J.

**********************************************************************
PRELIMINARY CALL FOR PAPERS AND CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT
TENTH ANNUAL NAVAJO STUDIES CONFERENCE
WITHIN AND BEYOND THE SACRED MOUNTAINS - A DECADE OF CULTURAL EXCHANGE
The University of New Mexico invites you to
participate in the Tenth Annual Navajo Studies
Conference, to be held from April 16-19, 1997,
in Albuquerque on the campus of UNM. This is a
preliminary call for papers. A more detailed 
announcement will be forthcoming. The deadline
for Abstracts is December 16, 1996.
The general conference theme is "Within and
Beyond the Sacred Mountains - A Decade of Cultural
Exchange." This theme recognizes 10 years of
Navajo Studies Conferences, and allows for a wide
range of papers. It also brings the Conference back
to UNM, where the first one was held in 1986.
The length of each presentation should be no 
more than 20 minutes, followed by a ten minute
discussion period. Your paper abstracts should
be no longer than 250 words. Information on 
concurrent sessions, workshops, session titles,
tours, registration and other details will be sent out
in the next few weeks. We hope that the conference
can be held at the same time as UNM's Nizhoni
Days, which are hosted by the American Indian
Student Services and The Kiva Club.
Send abstracts to:
Lucille Stilwell
Director, American Indian Student Services
1119 Mesa Vista Hall
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
505/277-6343
for now, email can be sent to:
jwinter@unm.edu
Later we will set up a special
email address and url
Thankyou!!

In article <01bba4af$7eb5db20$79c4b7c7@system> "Paul Pettennude"  writes:
>[snip]
>Yuri,
>I forgot to add this seemly unimportant point.  What dates does
>Encyclopedia Britannica tell us archaeologists to use when we work in
>Mesoamerica?  I AM talking about 4000 years ago when I am discussing
>the beginnings of civilization in this area.  If this is WRONG, tell
>me what dates Britannica says to use.  I will need to inform all of
>my colleagues that we have been making serious dating mistakes since
>we got out of grad school.
>By the way, what exactly is your professional background?  It would
>be helpful in carrying on a meaningful dialog.  If you are indeed a
>serious scholar, and since your extensive use of Encyclopedia
>Britannica indicates that you are, we will all bow at your feet in
>our thirst for knowledge.
>Paul
>[snip]
Welcome to Yuri's world, Paul. Here his intellect reigns supreme. The ground 
is littered with the bones of scholars who dared to think independently. He's 
not swayed by reasoned argument, factual evidence, or majority opposition. 
Capitulate now and avoid a slow death.
Cheers,
--Lenny__

piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski) writes:
>In article  "Alan M. Dunsmuir"  writes:
>>
>>Best & Woudhuizen is a totally unconvincing fantasy.
>I second that emotion!
Would anyone like to give any reasons for their opinion?
I have not read Best & Woudhuizen, but I have noticed that in the whole 
field of Linear A, it seems to be very popular to take shots at anyone 
who offers any data, but, no one wants to give any reasons.
I have also noted that there are other cases in which solutions have been 
rejected, out of hand, by "experts" and later turned out to be correct. 
(and the other way around, too.)
Henry Hillbrath

Yuri,
I forgot to add this seemly unimportant point.  What dates does
Encyclopedia Britannica tell us archaeologists to use when we work in
Mesoamerica?  I AM talking about 4000 years ago when I am discussing
the beginnings of civilization in this area.  If this is WRONG, tell
me what dates Britannica says to use.  I will need to inform all of
my colleagues that we have been making serious dating mistakes since
we got out of grad school.
By the way, what exactly is your professional background?  It would
be helpful in carrying on a meaningful dialog.  If you are indeed a
serious scholar, and since your extensive use of Encyclopedia
Britannica indicates that you are, we will all bow at your feet in
our thirst for knowledge.
Paul
Yuri Kuchinsky  wrote in article
<51lb3u$82g@news1.io.org>...
> Paul,
> 
> Your post has numerous errors.
> 
> Paul Pettennude (tekdiver@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> 
> : One major point to consider here and one which is going to raise
a
> : great deal of further debate is the fact that nobody was building
> : major ocean going craft at the time Mesoamerican civilizations
were
> : forming. 
> 
> This is obviously incorrect. The Polynesians had ocean-going craft
at 
> least 4000 years ago. Here are exerpts from a post I posted only a
few 
> days ago:
> 
> ********
> 
> Date: 12 Sep 1996 18:12:02 GMT
> 
> Around 1200 B.C, a new wave of Polynesians, the Lapita ware
peoples, was
> settling the Western islands (Fiji, etc.). They were making a major
> expansionary push. 
> 
> Enc. Brit. (1992) has a long and useful article about Pacific
Islands (v. 
> 25). What it says is that around that time the peoples of the
Lapita ware
> culture were sufficiently advanced to engage in long ocean voyages.
> (Their heartland was in the Bismarck Archipelago, closer to New
Guinea.)
> Sophisticated water craft (most likely single hulled) was available
> around 4000 years ago. (p. 245) 
> 
> So there's nothing that would have prevented those people from
arriving
> to S. American coast (not necessarily a planned expedition).
> 
> ********
> 
> : Take a look at those Polynesian
> : craft--count the oars. 
> 
> They had very sophisticated sail-boats.
> 
> : It's a long way from Hawaii to the mainland. 
> : That's basically where the transmigration stopped.  
> 
> Hawaii had nothing to do with it at that time. They travelled among
> islands much further south.
> 
> : The Polynesians did most of their travel on
> : calm seas. 
> 
> This is one of the strangest statements I've seen for a while in
these 
> groups... The Pacific is a "calm sea"? Really, Paul...
> 
> : The ocean from their closest point of contact was mild
> : compared to the North Pacific route and much colder.  I don't
think
> : they had the clothes to survive in the North Pacific if they
wanted
> : to.
> 
> Clothes? They could build boats, but could not make clothes?
> 
> : Doesn't anybody out there read history anymore? 
> 
> I sure hope they do... and that includes you...
> 
> : This is the stuff of
> : WRITTEN records, not the realm of fantastic speculation. 
> 
> Enc. Brit. is engaging in fantastic speculations?
> 
> : Please
> : remember, first and foremost, I am an underwater archaeologist
and
> : the travel you are speculating about is something I have spent
the
> : last 30 years studying. 
> 
> So, it looks like we have here one more specialist showing himself
to be
> sadly misinformed... 
> 
> : I would love to find evidence of contact. 
> 
> There's evidence aplenty, Paul, if you only open your mind and look
at 
> it. I've posted plenty of useful bibliography here. Look at my
webpage. 
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Yuri.
> 
>             =O=    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    =O=
>   --- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku ---
>  
> I am not young enough to know everything   ===   Oscar Wilde
> 
> 

Hugh Stewart McKenna  wrote:
>Mr Adrian P Tribe wrote:
>> 
>> samos@inforamp.net writes:
>> 
>> >   LONDON (AP) _ Just call him Braveheart II.
>> >   Scottish conservationists think they have found the mummified
>> >heart of Robert the Bruce, the legendary 14th-century Scottish king
>I missed this whole topic due to usenet servcies being down.
>Could someone post a syonopsis, or e-mail it to me?
>What does this do to the the traditional story of the earl of
>Douglas throwing the casket at some attacking Moors, and crying
>"BraveHeart, you were ever to the front. Where you go I will follow!"
>(or words to that effect)?
Greetings, Hugh--
This is what I posted a few weeks ago, with regard to the mummified
Brucian heart:
===================================================
The New York Times reported today on the re-discovery of King Robert
the Bruce's heart at Melrose Abbey--an artifact but for which my clan,
the Menzies, might not have its crest: "a Saracen's head proper".
So the story goes, after the death of Robert the Bruce in 1329, Sir
James Douglas was deputed to carry the king's embalmed heart "in a
silver casket round his neck" on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where
he was to oversee its burial in the precincts of the Holy Sepulchre in
Jerusalem.  With him were several Scottish knights, among them Chief
Lord Robert the Menzies.  Some time in the summer of 1330, our
faithful band encountered a force of "Infidels" on a plain near the
frontiers of Andalusia--then at war with King Alfonso of Leon and
Castile--and promptly got caught up in it.  Sir James Douglas was
overpowered by the Saracens, into whose midst he tossed the silver
casket, saying, "Now pass before us, gallant heart, as thou wert wont,
Douglas will follow thee or die!" 
Alas, Sir James was cut down; but Lord Robert Menzies was not willing
to give up yet, and he cried out "Toilleadh Die e s ni mis e", or "God
will it; I'll do it!", and proceeded to behead the Saracen who had
killed Sir James Douglas--whence came the "Saracen's head proper" on
the Chief's crest as well as the family motto, "Vil God, I zal".
After this aborted journey, the story goes on to add that the Bruce's
heart was brought back to Scotland and deposited at Melrose.  Well, at
least we know now at least that part of the story is true ;-)
==================================================
G M Menzies
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
Se non e vero, e molto ben trovato
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

I have seen mummies of a European back ground and yes they did turn dark,
"dark white that is"...but the  melanin or should I say, lack of melanin
deposits was still evident. Now, as for the ancient  Egyptians they are
dark as in dark black, and the melanin deposits in the mummies clearly
places them amomg the black races. Out of the  thousands maybe millions of
mummies found , only a few were light black, there were never any white
mummies found in Egypt,all of the Euro-semantics in the world cant make
black skin (light or dark) white.

Apparently you understood my message just fine Olice certain...in order
for you to reply with such eurocentric tripe as this:
>Has anyone else noticed that the tables have definitely turned 
as far as racist attitudes are concerned?   "Afrocentrists" 
(ie. racists and bigots, IMHO) love to dig up dirt concerning 
other groups of people ("white Europeans" in particular),
and ignore the atrocities committed by their own particular 
group.   They insinuate that all evil in the world is 
attributable to any group other than their own.  The hate and 
bigotry just shine through.< I my spelling was so bad you would not have
been able to make  rediculous remarks concerning..LOL...reverse racism,
whatever that  maybe. It is funny how someone of another culture can point
out the vicious racist acts that europeans commit and then  in turn get
accused of being racist, just for telling the truth..."How sick can you
continue to remain?""

>>Fly on a plane that follows little red lines, of course.  Then to
make
>>it interesting...the plane won't land...we'll just parachute out the
>>back and happen to land about two trees away from the main entrance
of
>>the city.  Of course, we'll have to shoot a couple of nazi's on the
way
>> before we can get to the door where we shout the ancient password of
>>entry :"Mellon!"
>>
>>Hey, this could become a great screenplay.  hehe
>>
>>Amanda :)
>I am afraid it won't work.  You see Atlantis is underwater.  By the
time
>we got two tree away from the entrance by parachute, we would be very
>wet, and, more upsettingly, dead.  Moreover, the only way that we
could
>shoot Nazis on the way down is if they were in a submarine!  Tricky
this
>one.  I suggest that the way forward is to get the Nazis drunk in a
bar
>in Cairo, then enslave them, and force them underground to dig a 
>Transatlantic tunnel.  If we happened to come across any fossilised
>Egyptian sailors on the way, whose remains were loaded to the gills
with
>cocaine, this would be a bonus.  But I'm not going until you agree to 
>the thigh length rubber boots!
>-- 
>Jon 
Well, well.  Ok.  As long as the thigh-high leather boots can be purple
and green tye dye.  :)  As for the tunnel...good idea!  Perhaps we can
use our enslaved nazi's for even longer working hours if we let them
chop up and snort any mummies they find.
Amanda
:)
P.S.  For all you people out there, who haven't followed this thread
from the beginning....It's a JOKE!!!!   DOH!!!!   Laugh!  Have fun!!! 
Get bent!