Afrca to N. Europe to Japan: the Jomon & Anu - Ainu Ques

[PaulMarcW]

[Forum Monk writes of] “Noah's curse on the descendants of Ham”

[Marc writes] Hello FM. My father was an Episcopal minister. His church was the first one which ordained women of the Anglican Church and the first female Anglican bishop (Barbara Harris) came from that group. I suppose I may have heard it from him as well that Noah’s curse was on Ham. I don’t know how that bible interpretation began though I’ve heard it throughout my life.

However, the bible states that it is Canaan who is cursed - not Ham. To me, the claim which is not true (God cursed Ham) gets 99% of the press; whereas the claim that is true (Ham’s descendents – and they are black – create the nations) gets 1% to 0% of the attention and press. Is virtually ignored.

.....Genesis 9:

24. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

And the verse which is true (i.e. Ham was the father of the black races and we can read from the bible it was blacks who created the nations) gets no attention at all.

A comment. While we "accept" that blacks have been the slaves of their brothers, Canaanites were cursed and it was the Canaanites who were the Phoenicians. Phoenicians may have been cursed but we got our alphabet, beautiful art, seafaring trade, and the settlement of countless lands in Europe still in existence from them.

And Europa was a Phoenician goddess! Imagine. Europe was named from an African (at least by phenotype when you go back to the earliest Phoenicians) goddess! Canaananites may have had a later two millennium period of slavery but prior to that time, they laid the foundation for the world we live in today.

In any case,

.....Genesis 10:

6: And the sons of Ham: Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.
7: And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtechas. And the son of Radmah; Sheba and Dedan.
8. And Cush begat Nimrod; he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
9. He was a mighty hunter before the lord; wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord.
10. And the beginning of his Kingdom was Babel, and Erech, in the Land of Shinar.
11. Out of that land went forth Assur, and builded Ninevah, and the city of Rehoboth, and Calah.


http://www.beforebc.de/500_mesopotamia/ ... 00-01.html

Now, I am not singling you out for this erroneous view as I have stated that my father as well said the same thing – and he was a black activist (as well as having known Nelson Mandella, Desmond Tutu, Mohammed Ali and others: http://www.beforebc.de/AfricanaResource ... Album.html)

[Forum Monk writes] From Marc, there's been "very little contribution. I am still hoping to discuss his ideas with him.

[Marc writes] FM. Elsewhere I wrote of why so little is heard from me: babysitting watching my youngest daughter most of the week during the summer at a place where there's no computer; trying to get a seven day's work squeezed into three when there's shopping to do, house to clean, a sort-of 9 to 5 job to do. Also, sometimes I just don't have anything that sounds interesting to contribute. It would be boring to a reader. Out of respect for you I don't write.

[Michelle H writes] IMHO the posts look like photo scans for presentation posters at a lecture or seminar.

[Marc writes] Hello Michelle. I've been making these pages for about five years. They are presentation posters but that's only been online.

[Ishtar writes] unless Marc owns the pictures, which he doesn't. He also freely downloaded them from somewhere.

[Marc writes] Hi Ishtar. I block the pictures because I have yet to locate the owners when it's not clearly stated. The pages sometimes have 40 images. It's hard to get 40 permissions. It is difficult as heck to find owners. For instance, I was looking for a better picture of a mosaic I had of Dionysus riding a panther from Delos of 700 BC.

I worked along with a librarian of ancient Greco-Roman art to track the owner of the picture down. This required pouring through volume after volume with no success. Then she gave me a list of libraries throughout Europe to write to. Weeks went by and I was given two libraries, finally, in Delos. At Delos, however, I was told that they could take a picture for me for a hefty price.

I'd like to do things the right way and me placing a bar across the pictures is a way of saying I don't want to act like I own the material I use - the bar is the proof of it ... in my view.

[Beagle writes] Hello Marc. I gather that you're going by Paul Marc in this forum. You don't know me as Beagle.

[Marc writes] I hadn't known who you were until your comment. However, from several forums, well do I know your style and now who you are. I say to you, "Greetings."

[PaulMarcW]

Sorry. The above link doesn't work as the ")" is fixed at the end of the link. It's

http://www.beforebc.de/AfricanaResource ... Album.html

[Ishtar]

Hello Paul Marc

I'm glad you came back and answered all our questions.

I respect that you have your own reasons to marr the pictures and the fact that you don't need to do so legally, in that case, is neither here nor there. So I shall butt out and mind my own business.

But having said that, I believe your message could be communicated with more clarity. A few of us inferred wrongly from your copyright message that you wanted others to apply to you for any use of the pictures because you held the copyright.

It took several days for us to unravel what you actually meant. So can I suggest that maybe others visiting your site might make the same mistake? If you just changed the words to simply: "Copyright applied for." it would prevent any further misunderstandings.

There is also some html coding that you can use that gives a message to people who right click on your pictures that they cannot have them, and they don't get the Save option come up. So then you wouldn't need to marr them. But let me know if you'd like to know how to do that.

Now I'm butting out!

[PaulMarcW]

Hi Ishtar. I don't mind if people download the material I assembled, though - or even use it.

Thank you for your helpful suggestions.


All the best,

[Minimalist]

Okay, now that we've all had our group hug, let's get back to it.

Paul, I'm highly skeptical of putting too much emphasis on words which "sound alike" or even worse, which "sound" like modern words.
For example, amo in latin means I love. Ammo, in English, means bullets. Granted that sometimes one leads to the other but I don't think one can draw an inference that there is any common root.

We have seen the vague, ancient Egyptian term, "apiru" be usurped by the theologians to mean "Hebrew" on the basis of the mere fact that it "sounds" similar. The fact that archaeologists and historians have dismissed the claim does not slow them down a bit.

If one could show actual "loan words" ( as biblical scholars will show when Greek words enter the text in the Hellenistic period) that would be something else but we know nothing of the Jomon language.

If Out of Africa is true then, by definition, all modern people are descended from "Africans." If Multi-Regionalism is true then the thing gets a bit dicier but there still seems to be evidence that Homo Erectus arose in Africa as well....just a million years earlier, give or take.

[rich]

PaulMarc - in reference to your question:

My father was an Episcopal minister. His church was the first one which ordained women of the Anglican Church and the first female Anglican bishop (Barbara Harris) came from that group. I suppose I may have heard it from him as well that Noah’s curse was on Ham. I don’t know how that bible interpretation began though I’ve heard it throughout my life.

PaulMarcW wrote:

.....Genesis 9:

24. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

The reason they say Ham was cursed is because Ham was the younger son of Noah and Canaan was the younger son of Ham - basically an eye for an eye type of deal. Ham was the one who wronged Noah - not Canaan so the fault lay on the shoulders of Ham for both his wrong doing and also for the curse on Canaan.

Not saying it makes it right, but that is the reason why they say that. Myself I feel you punish the one responsible, not the child for the parents wrong doing, besides me not agreeing with servitude or slavery anyways. To me slavery is just a way for the wealthy to get wealthier in a wrong way. But blame the ones who wrote the book - I don't believe other ancient religions expressed this.

[Cognito]

If Out of Africa is true then, by definition, all modern people are descended from "Africans." If Multi-Regionalism is true then the thing gets a bit dicier but there still seems to be evidence that Homo Erectus arose in Africa as well....just a million years earlier, give or take.

How do we "check box E" on the OOA vs. Multiregionalist debate? I really don't dispute that virtually all modern genetics currently point to a recent African origin. However, at the same time there is a strong case for admixture among populations. I don't see African gracile forms in Europe until about 28kya so I suspect there was a lot of cross-breeding going on prior to that time - or at least being attempted (somewhat like a frat party!)

I do agree with Paul Marc in one area: if North African empires were not placed under the Roman military boot, civilisation would have developed in a far different manner with a far greater African influence. Eventually, the Phoenicians and their progeny would have colonised most of Africa and eventually the Americas 1,500 years earlier than Columbus with far different results for the native populations.

[Minimalist]

I don't see African gracile forms in Europe until about 28kya so I suspect there was a lot of cross-breeding going on prior to that time - or at least being attempted (somewhat like a frat party!) Very Happy

No. no...the Club says there was no hanky-panky going on!

[War Arrow]

Okay, now that we've all had our group hug, let's get back to it.

Paul, I'm highly skeptical of putting too much emphasis on words which "sound alike" or even worse, which "sound" like modern words.
For example, amo in latin means I love. Ammo, in English, means bullets. Granted that sometimes one leads to the other but I don't think one can draw an inference that there is any common root.

We have seen the vague, ancient Egyptian term, "apiru" be usurped by the theologians to mean "Hebrew" on the basis of the mere fact that it "sounds" similar. The fact that archaeologists and historians have dismissed the claim does not slow them down a bit.

If one could show actual "loan words" ( as biblical scholars will show when Greek words enter the text in the Hellenistic period) that would be something else but we know nothing of the Jomon language.

If Out of Africa is true then, by definition, all modern people are descended from "Africans." If Multi-Regionalism is true then the thing gets a bit dicier but there still seems to be evidence that Homo Erectus arose in Africa as well....just a million years earlier, give or take.

I tend towards agreeing with most of this. I also tend to regard OOA as more plausible than multiregionalism, though I must freely admit being only poorly schooled in arguments for the latter, so I'm not sure I'd want to put money on any of it.
A propos of some of this, much stock has at times been placed on the nahuatl stem teo- (which implies sacred properties) and its "resemblance" to European equivalents which give us words like 'theology' and 'Dios' (God) yet, leaving aside the point that it would be very strange if there were no such convergences in unrelated languages, close inspection reveals the Nahuatl (and I'd hesitantly add Native American) meaning of sacred to be quite distinctly different to that which was understood by Europeans at the time of the conquest.

[Ishtar]

Paul Marc

I promised to dig out my research for you on the Anu tribe. I'm afraid it's a bit long so dependng on how we go, I might spread it over two or three posts:

We start off with the Indian flood myth. In the Rig-veda (10.63.1) Manu is the first ancestor. According to the Shatapatha Brahmana (1.8.1), Manu and his family were survivors of the world flood.

Thus, according to this mythology, we are all descended from Manu. This doesn’t, imo, mean that we all Indian. Imo, these mythological stories were passed on orally long before the composers of the Vedas ever came into India more than 10,000 years ago.

Manu’s important descendants are the Pauravas, Ayu, Nahusha and the great patriarch, Yayati.

Yayati is the father of the five sons – Anu, Puru, Druhyu, Turvashu and Yadu.

Those five sons are the forefathers of the five main tribes – some of this will be contentious, so please remember (before you let loose on me!) that I’m just recounting what’s in the mythology and the Indian interpretation of it:

· the Puru tribe, connected with the Yamuna and Ganges region. The Rig-vedic people who developed Vedic culture in north central India and the Punjab along the river Saraswati. They eventually became the Paurava dynasty are thought to be the ancestors of the Egyptian Pharoahs.
· the Anu tribe, related to the north, to Punjab, as well as Bengal and Bihar. Mainly southern Kashmir along the Parushni (modern day Ravi) river (Rig-veda 7.18.13) and spread over western Asia developing the various Iranian cultures. (This is the same river Ravi where Sudas, a Puru, fought the ten Anu kings).
· the Druhyu tribe, related to the west and northwest, such as Ghandara (present day Kandahar) and Afghanistan. They are believed to have spread across Europe as the Druids or the Celts. A first group is said to have travelled north-west and developed the proto-Germanic dialect, and another group migrated further south and developed the proto-Hellenic and Italic-Celtic dialects.
· the Turvashas tribe, related to Bengal, Bihar and Orissa and are the ancestors of the Dravidians and the Yavanas. The Indians believe that the Turks came from the Turvashu tribe and that some of the Yavanas became the Hebrews.
· the Yadu tribe – related to Gujarat and Rajasthan, from Mathura to Dwaraka and Somnath. Became known as the Lunar dynasty (also known as Yadavas, the tribe of Krishna.)

The genealogy following Yayati is in the later Vedantic literature, the Srimad Bhagavathan. The dating of the SB is, as usual, controversial - the latest dates being 9th to 10th centuries CE, and the earliest relying on the fact that the SB (as well as its contemporary Ramayana) mentions four-tusked elephants – these became extinct after the Pliocene.

So on to the SB’s family tree of Anu. This is from Canto 9:

The sons of Yayäti’s fourth son, Anu, were Sabhänara, Caksu and Paresnu. Of these three, the sons and grandsons of Sabhänara were, in succession, Kälanara, Srnjaya, Janamejaya, Mahäsäla and Mahämanä. The sons of Mahämanä were Usinara and Titiksu. Usinara had four sons, namely Sibi, Vara, Krmi and Daksa. Sibi also had four sons—Vrsadarbha, Sudhira, Madra and Kekaya. The son of Titiksu was Rusadratha, who begot a son named Homa. From Homa came Sutapä and from Sutapä, Bali. In this way the dynasty continued.

Begotten by Dirghatamä in the womb of the wife of Bali were Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Suhma, Pundra and Odra, all of whom became kings. From Anga came Khalapäna, whose dynasty included Diviratha, Dharmaratha and Citraratha, also called Romapäda, one after another.

Mahäräja Dasaratha gave in charity one of his daughters, by the name Säntä, to his friend Romapäda because Romapäda had no sons. Romapäda accepted Säntä as his daughter, and the great sage Rsasrnga married her.

So that's their geneaology table. I'll take the story on in the next post.

[Ishtar]

The Indian historians say that the Anu tribe came down from Kashmir and settled the Indus valley now known as the Punjab. Their priests were the Bhrigus, the fire priests, and most of the fire rituals in the later books of the Rig-veda were composed by them.

I say later books because most of the books, including the earlier ones, were composed by the Purus and more specifically the rishis (shamans) of the House of Baratha. The Purus, who are thought to have entered India from further east, were not into fire but Soma, the psychotropic plant that powered their shamanic ceremonies rather like South American shamans use peyote and ayuhuasca today.

The Purus came down from the east and then worked their way westwards towards the Indus valley. After a huge battle on the river Beas, the Purus defeated the Anus and pushed them out of the Punjab (which they named after themselves) and the Anu then migrated out of India towards the west and northwest.

One of these Anu, and descendant of the Bhrigu fire priests, is thought to be Zoroaster Spitama, which is why fire is so central to Zoroastrianism. These Anu with their Bhrigu fire priests are also thought to have made it as far north-west as Scandinavia. Interestingly, the Scandinavian fire priests were called brisingrs - although that's just one small commonality. The biggest commonality is the similarity between the stories of the Scandinavian Edda and the Indian Vedas - and, for instance, Skanda is a Vedic god of war, and 'nav' in Sanskrit is the origin of our word 'navy'. A navy led by the god of war, Skanda. So maybe that who the Vikings were... possibly anyway.

Here another interesting commonality between the Skandas and the Vedics.

This is one of the seals that were found in the Harrappan culture in the Indus valley and dated to about 3,000 BC.



And this is the Gundestrop cauldron that was found in Denmark and dated to 1,000 BC.



I'm sure you can see a similarity in the two figures - they are both Prajapati, the Lord of the Animals.

But even more interesting, on the back of the cauldron is depicted a famous battle scene from the Celtic/Welsh Mabinogian. In this story, the dead warriors are revived by putting them in a magic cauldron, and sent out to fight again and again. Some commentors on the Gundestrop cauldron have misunderstood this scene to represent human sacrifice.



But it's interesting to find a cauldron in Scandinavia with a major Indian god on the front and a Celtic story on the back! Because then we have to look at the Irish Tuatha da Danaan, or the Children of Danu who were originally called the Children d'Anu - i.e the Children of Anu.

Hope some of this helps!

[Minimalist]

But it's interesting to find a cauldron in Scandinavia with a major Indian god on the front and a Celtic story on the back!

But then we need to know if it was made and decorated in Scandinavia or if it was stolen on one of their raids. The reach of the Norse was truly astonishing given the technology available. Their boats were equally well suited to the open sea or the great rivers of Russia.




Once you get to Constantinople you are basically in contact with the rest of the world.

[Ishtar]

Yes, that's true and a good point. But if the Norse stole it, why does it have a Vedic god one side and a Celtic myth on the other?

We also have to consider that the Celts were called the Children of Anu.

And they got around a bit too. They were also widespread in northern Europe - in fact, I think the French megaliths are attributed to them.

[Minimalist]

Yes, that's true and a good point. But if the Norse stole it, why does it have a Vedic god one side and a Celtic myth on the other?

Depends on who they stole it from....or, to give the devil their due, traded for it. The Vikings did as much trading as fighting. They were easy! Whatever worked.

Recall from antiquity that Celtic tribesmen drove into Asia Minor forming the region known as Galatia. I'm sure they brought their stories along for the ride.

[Ishtar]

Hmmm.... you're missing the point - a cauldron with a Vedic god on one side and a Celtic story on the other. Doesn't matter were it was found or who owned it or stole it. Those two themes should be incompatible .... unless the Celts were from India.