Chinese Discovery America in 1421

[Berzerker]

Wernazuma - Do you know anything about this?

On the Iberian Peninsula the Basque language is often considered unique. Heralded as the oldest language in the world it is widely credited as belonging to no other language group. Remarkably however it was found to bear an astonishing resemblance to a dialect spoken by the Otonu tribe in Central America. So close was this similarity that Basque missionaries had no trouble in preaching to the native Indians in their very own language.

http://www.nasca.org.uk/Atlantis/atlantis.html

I heard the Basque language had no linguistic affinities to any other language.

[Tolls]

"Your turn to bleat..."

Merely pointing out that you bring up Hapgood everytime, and everytime you are shown that no-one who knows the subject agrees with Hapgood's work at all...

...and you read too much Hancock...

[Az]

I heard the Basque language had no linguistic affinities to any other language.

I've heard that the Basques are connected to the georgians.

[Wernazuma III]

Uff, it's kind of tiring to keep anwering. Anyhow, about the Basques. That's an old tale told by Gregorio Garcia ~1610 and again by Diego Andrés Rocha in late 17th century. They claimed it to be close to the language spoken in Peru, even claiming that basque missionaries could talk easily to them or "learned the language much more easily", still none of these claims have made it into linguistic theory, so why should we care. If you read Rocha (and I've done this!), you'll see that he creates his theory especially to legitimate the Spanish claims to America by kinship.
Generally, on all these issues, read
Lee Elridge Huddleston, Origins of the American Indians – European Concepts, 1492-1729, Austin 1967.

A very good read.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Even if he did nothing but write a book showing these maps, that would be enough for me.

He wasn't the first to show these maps, they're not questioned in their authenticity by any scholar, you can find especially the Finaeus map in every well sorted compendium of old maps.

The Fineaus map shows Antarctica as Ned as posted. But why would these ancient maps show a land mass there in the first place?
A question of projection, still doesn't explain why the maps show any land there.

Read my post again about WHY Terra Australis has always been there. They always said the country was "nundum cognita" - not yet known.

Which is evidence Antarctica was known from even earlier times. No one here is suggesting Piri Re'is made his map from his personal experience.

Well, Hapgood says that Piri Reis and Oronce Fine had used "accurate source maps", i.e. exact maps showing an ice free Antarctica - yet, the Terra Australis is on much earlier maps too who apparently are not at all matching those coastline in the least (just like Reis' and Fine's map don't do it.

Well, I believe an early map showed the land bridge only to be incorporated into later maps, but why would the inclusion of a land mass that no longer exists be on these maps? An educated guess? Maybe to explain Indians in the new world? Possibly, but that's just another coincidence that should raise eyebrows. The map shows a roughly 1,000 mile wide land mass connecting Asia to N America, and that is roughly the size of the Bering land bridge.

You mean the Bering land bridge of the Ice ages?
Anyhow, yes, the connection by a land bridge or a narrow strait was a theoretical projection to allow the Indians to arrive from Asia to America without big ships - again, read Father Acosta directly or Huddleston as secondary source. It's simply not at any rate thorow working to simply assume they had some maps from the ice ages, now completely lost without a trace, which aren't mentioned as sources by those authors at all, just because one map or two show some land that at first sight roughly resembles such ice age features. There's dozens or hundreds of maps who also show that landbridge or a narrow strait, but which aren't at all similar. It's really easy to do this, just a statistical thing and only if you don't compare exactly, but roughly. It's even more enlightening, that he uses different maps to make his point with Bering-Street and with Antarcitca.

No time now for more, yet I'd really like why you find this so interesting:

It is also interesting that the Aztec capital was named Tenochtitlan.

[GePap]

Why would someone know of antartica so much earlier tahn Australia: look at the map Ned posted, in the upper part, you see an island labelled Java, which was certainly known by then: between Java and the Southern lands: nothing.

Does that "Southern land" look anything like Australia, simply shifted further south?

[Ned]

Why did Fine locate Australia at the South Pole and call the portion facing the Atlantic "Antarctica?"

Also, it seems to me that the Bering Straight is probably navigable by even ancient man. After all, the straight is only 53 miles across and has numerous Islands in the middle, many of which are inhabited. I presume, even though I have not been there, that one can see these Islands from either Alaska or Russia. So, it would not take a too-intrepid sailor to navigate to the closest island and from there to the next, until they were across.

Obviously, people could have gone both ways across the straight. So, it is possible that knowledge of the New World reached the Old without supposing or presupposing cross-ocean voyages. It is also possible that knowledge of the Old World reached the new by travelers who crossed the straight in ancient times - again without supposign or presupposing cross-ocean voyages.

[Ned]

Here is a snippet from a story about Wales, Alaska:

"Wales (population 165) is at the narrowest part of The Bering Strait, with views of Big and Little Diomede Islands, and on a clear day, of the Chukotsk Peninsula in Russia."

Note, one can see all the way across the straight.

[Berzerker]

Tolls -

Merely pointing out that you bring up Hapgood everytime, and everytime you are shown that no-one who knows the subject agrees with Hapgood's work at all...

It isn't often someone starts these kinds of threads

...and you read too much Hancock...

Guilty as charged. But I don't find as compelling as Sitchin...

Wernazuma - Tenochtitlan, I believe it translates roughly as City of Enoch.

[Tolls]

...both are, um, how can I put this? Idiots?


"I believe it translates roughly as City of Enoch"

I believe (and any decent Nahuatl dictionary will confirm) that it transates roughly as The Place of the Cactus...all to do with their prophecy of where they would found a city or something. Been awhile since I ran through Mexican history...

Whoever did your translation was doing a rubbish job of it...it's like looking at Moscow and assuming it was named after bovines...

[Tolls]

...and a question about Votan.

I can't find this deity anywhere with respect to the Maya.

There is, of course, Pacal Votan, who ruled Palenque in the 7th century, but I assume it's not him you're talking about...

[Proteus_MST]

He refers to the God "Wotan"
which sounds like "Votan"
(and is also called "Odin" or Wodan),

king and father of all the other Gods and God of Runes, Poetry and Wisdom
[same Role as Zeus/Jovia played for the Greeks and Romans]).
For References you should read the Edda,
where the Life of the nordic Gods is being told.

Here is a Reference to Wotan on the web:

http://www.public.asu.edu/~atrja/odin.html

[Tolls]

I know him...it's the reference to a Mayan god called Votan that's thrown me, not the Norse Odin/Wotan etc...

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Tolls
I know him...it's the reference to a Mayan god called Votan that's thrown me, not the Norse Odin/Wotan etc...

Oh,
sorry seems like I somehow miszundastood your post

Searching for Votan and Maya in Google, I have found some References to Votan:

delivered by opening twelve paths through the sea." These statements are in accord with a Maya tale known as the legend of Votan.... The legend relates the arrival in Yucatan, circa 1000 B.C. by the chronicler's calculations, of "the first man whom God had sent to this region to people and parcel out the land that is now called America." His name was Votan (meaning unknown); his emblem was the Serpent. "He was descendant of the Guardians, of the race of Can. His place of origin was a land called Chivim." He made a total of four voyages. The first time he landed he established a settlement near the coast. After some time he advanced inland and "at the tributary of a great river built a city which was the cradle of this civilization." He called the city Nachan, "which means Place of Serpents." On his second visit he surveyed the newfound land examining its subterranean zones and underground passages; one such passage was said to have gone right through a mountain near Nachan. When he returned to America the fourth time he found discord and rivalry among the people. So he divided the realm into four domains, establishing a city to serve as the capital of each. Palenque is mentioned as one of them; another appears to have been near the Pacific coast. The others are unknown.
"....Zelia Nuttal.... pointed out that the Maya word for serpent, Can, paralleled the Hebrew Canaan. If so, the Maya legend, telling that Votan was of the race of Can and his symbol was the serpent, could be using a play of words to state that Votan came from Canaan. This certainly justifies our wondering why Nachan, "Place of Serpents," is virtually identical to the Hebrew Nachash that means "serpent."

Source: http://www.geocities.com/elchasqui_2...hinbook4d.html

and here (where it is said that Votan is another Name for Quetzalcoatl):

A book in the language of the Quiches of Guatemala, said to have been written by Votan, a local name for Quetzalcoatl, was at one time in the possession of the Bishop of Chiapas, who introduced portions of it into his own work. In this book Votan declares that at the express command of the Lord he came to the New World to apportion the land among seven families which he brought with him. Leaving the land of Valum Chivim, he passed the dwelling of Thirteen Snakes and arrived in Valum Votan, where he founded the great city of Nachan (City of Snakes)

Source: http://www.wisdomworld.org/additiona...d-Serpent.html

On this source it is said, that Kukulkan transfprmed himself into a shaman called Votan:

http://www.fellowshipofisis.com/liturgy/fortuna8.html

And here we have:

As the sun comes from the east, so the hero-gods who bring with them culture and enlightenment have an oriental origin. As Votan, as Kabil, the "Red Hand " who initiates the people into the arts of writing and architecture, these gods are civilising men of the sun as surely as is Quetzalcoatl

and

The more probable theory is that of Förstemann, who sees in L the god Votan, who is identical with the Aztec earth-god, Tepeyollotl.

Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/nam/mmp/mmp3.htm


Obviously there seems to be a Votan which is either a Messenger of Quetzaslcoatl (or Quetzalcoatl himself) or a Race of Gods or an obscure Earth God.
Also Votan seems to be responsible for civilizing the Maya and / or for the founding of one or more Cities of the Maya.
And his symbol was the serpent, just as Quetzalcoatl.

Oh and obviously this Votan doesn´t seem to be Pacal Votan
(Perhaps the Mayas had the same custom of including the Name of their gods into their Kings names as the Egyptians had for their Pharaos (Amun-Ra for example)?)

[Tolls]

The problem is, if you look up "Mayan Gods" the non-new ageist sites (which seem to be what you have linked to) don't mention him at all in their lists...so I'm wondering where Votan is supposed to come from.