Deluge of Atlantis

Deluge of Atlantis
Deluge of Atlantis

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Fomorian Giants, Adenas and the Giants of the Bible

Irish Fomorian Giant



























Giant Mound Skeletons from Pennsylvania., Spanish Hill site.




Source:
http://www.spanishhill.com/skeletons/default.shtml

This is a matter where I started the ball rolling and others seized upon the idea and kept it going. Not necessarily keeping the whole of my original thesis complete but then the explanation involved some specialized discussion about genetics and inbreeding.

On September 6,2007 I had an internet radio podcast interview on Oopa-Loopa Cafe which can be accessed here:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/oopa-loopa-cafe/2007/09/07/giant-talk-w-dale-drinnon

Under the Title "Giant Talk With Dale Drinnon". In that discussion I mentioned that I had Identifiedcertain mounds said to have held giant burials, that they were Adena mounds, and then I surmised that the Adenas had bred a race of giant warriors, perhaps a warrior aristocracy. What they had aimed for was only to make them huge and powerful, but since they were highly inbred they tended to accumulate certain mutations, such as extra fingers (Polydactylism)and the double tooth row, and sometimes odd horny or bony growths in the skin, sometimes reported as horns on the heads of some of the skulls. These are all known medical conditions. I further surmised that these same giant warriors were exported overseas and were the same as the deformed Fomorians in Irish mythology as well as the 6-fingered Giants that David was said to have fought (the Anakim and Rephaim) Jewish legends about the Giant Rephaim include statements that they lived over the sea or on the other side of the Earth.















Comparison of Neanderthal to CroMagnon



The European Cro-Magnons started out as big people generally and by the time the Spanish conquered the CroMagnons of the Canary Islands they were still big. The basic stock the Adenas grew out of seem to have been a CroMagnon stock: for one thing they had the same peculiar flattening of the tibias. The Adenas also favored cranial deformation in the kind that flattens the head from front to back. This is done by tying the baby down to a cradleboard.
Cradleboarding flattens the back of the head








At any rate, here is a retelling of my hypothesis via one of the Creationist websites and using what seem to be a couple of my original illustrations.

“Gigantic” Newcomers to the Prehistoric St. Lawrence River Valley
by G. Iudhael Jewell
Right: Adena skull from the Ohio State Archaeological Museum, Columbus, Ohio.













A Strange people intruded into the St. Lawrence Valley around 2,000 BC, huge, rugged, very tall, with massive skulls, very roundbroad heads.
They were physically different than the long-narrow headed native "Archaic" peoples. The big, roundheaded newcomers brought D-shaped 11-inch celts.
There appears to have been a link between their society and the isolated Meadowood Culture of 800 to 500 BC on the border of the lower St. Lawrence river at Quebec- New York-Ontario.
They also formed a nexus with the Adena culture of huge round-heads. Prufer and Dragoo always insisted that Adena came from eastern Lake Ontario, via upper New York to West Virginia and the Ohio River.
Now the Canadian Museum of Civilization (a citadel of conservative isolationism and liberal political-correctness) admits that in the Terminal phase (2,000 to 1,000 BC) of the "Middle Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Culture" (previously called "Laurentian Late Archaic") a tall people (women 170 cm and men 180.7 cm) with "hyperdontia, or extra teeth... a genetic trait... biological...", dwelt in the St. Lawrence-Ottawa Valley (J.V. Wright, History Native Peoples of Canada: 10,000 to 1000 BC).
Strangely, the skeletal remains of children were very rare. Plenty of cremations, though, in glaring contrast to the Red Paint People, whether Maritime or Laurentian Archaic, who had elaborate burials for kids.
The Brook Street Burial Below: On December 6, 1960, the skeletal remains of a man who lived in the area about 700 BC were discovered by Douglas Yaxley of Peterborough, Canada.
Buried with the man were twenty-nine artifacts attributed to the Point Peninsula Culture, which occupied the Trent River system before the Christian era. Click and drag photo to resize.

Irish tradition recounts that the brutal, warlike Fomorians were "giants" who invaded in ships from Africa, and demanded children at Halloween time. Pict tradition held the same.
They were finally driven north to the Hebrides Isles off northwest Scotland and to Tory Island off northwest Ireland in the deep Atlantic. From there, they preyed on the people of Ulster. The Formorian giants were supposedly endowed with double-rows of teeth.
Interestingly, Anglo-American settlers in the upper Ohio were told Native traditions of "giants," and early settlers claimed they were digging up (from Lake Erie-to the Ohio River) the skeletons of "giants' with massive skulls and double rows of teeth.
The skeletal remains of pygmies (often of Australoid type), especially in the Tennessee Valley have been excavated, confirming Native traditions.
The Mandarins of the Canadian Museum of Civilization (Hull/Ottawa) also at long last admit: "Historically documented native beliefs in Canada appear to have been quite similar to those of the pre- Christian Celtic, Germanic and old Scandinavian peoples of northwestern Europe" ... (Old Scandinavian means Lapps and Finns).
Source: Ancient American Issue# 42







Adena Burial










One of the specific reports I knew about from the beginning was a report from Indiana in the 1920s. In 1925, several amateurs digging in an Indian mound at Walkerton, Indiana, uncovered the skeletons of eight very ancient humans measuring in height from eight to almost nine feet. All eight giants had been buried in “substantial copper armor.” This was a report I alluded to in the podcast although I did not have the reference before me then. This case and many other cases like it are cited on this web page:
"Accounts of Giants in North America"

http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/N.Am/Giants.N.Am1.html





Lovelock Cave Giant Remains

17 comments:

  1. Did you hear of Lloyd Pye and his skull of the starchild as he calls it? Try to open up his website.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, as a matter of fact I was just putting up the images of it this morning in one of my Yahoo groups.

    I tend to the notion it was a Hydrocephalus. Of course I'd be happy if somebody showed that diagnosis to be incorrect.

    Best Wishes, Dale D.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just received this private email on the matter and I thought I should make reference to it here:

    "Interesting – and I will come back to you concerning your ideas. But first I have a question: Is the picture of the scull a picture of the Lovelock giant’s scull (not the jaw, I know that one, but the scull on black background)?

    Regards
    Terje "Terry" Dahl
    Editor
    Giants:
    www.sydhav.no/giants/giants.htm
    Six Fingers:
    www.sydhav.no/sixfingers/sixfingers.htm"

    The one on the black background is also intended to be one of the Lovelock cave giants and it is of the correcte physical-anthropological type: I actually got it from a website which had reprinted my original article above. I shall contact the webmaster for its source.

    Best Wishes, Dale D.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bible research who were the giants of the Bible; http://koti.phnet.fi/petripaavola/Biblegiants.html

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Irish tradition recounts that the brutal, warlike Fomorians were "giants" who invaded in ships from Africa, and demanded children at Halloween time. Pict tradition held the same."
    Fascinating bit. Any info on why they wanted other people's children? Slavery?(but then you could also take adults)To avoid even more inbreeding?(Still could take adults..)Religious reasons?
    Does this coincide somehow with the lack of children skeletons? As in them having serious trouble with procreation?
    Any Answer would be appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May I point out that the Fomorians were probably utterly fictitious. In Irish paganism, they seem to have been the supernatural opponents of the gods. When Christianity took over, the gods were demoted to heroes of yore and their foees to demons of yore. The term Fomorians (Irish FOMHORAIGH) probably means "swellers beneath the sea"). I am doubtful that they were conceived as giants originally, though in later Irish the word may have been used in this sense, as FOAWR became the word for a giant in Manx. (The language of the Isle of Man, related to Irish). I have also seen FOMHORACH used in a medieval or renaissance document to mean a centaur.

      Ronan Coghlan

      Delete
    2. At the risk of sounding flippant, may I point out in turn that anything in fiction is automatically fictitious, we are not concerned with fiction per se and we are never actually concerned with fiction per se. What we are considerig is whether the fiction stands in for a real-life fact. Most things in fiction are actually based on some real thing or else the descriptions become incomprehensible: hence most legendary creatures are described in terms of "like-this and like-that." In that context, your arguments are valueless to make any sort of determination as to whether the Fomorians were meant to represent something that was real or not, and the same argument used on any other category of legendary creatures described in fiction anywhere. One of my original arguments (not quoted here) is that the meaning of the Irish FOMHORAIGH was the exact linguistic equivalent to the Biblical REPHAIM (Ha-Raphah') and that the two concepts were probably related.

      Delete
  6. I believe the implied answer is that they were to become slaves or forced labourers of some kind, or trainable to become military adjuncts such as suppliers, cooks, smiths and weaponsmakers: they were presumably unskilled labour basically but ifg they could be trained in more useful skills, then that was a bonus. And the reason they wanted children primarily was because they would be more pliable and less rebellious, and therefore with less likelihood of their rebelling or running away.

    The Giants themselves took their choice of women but there may well have been fertility problems: inbreeding does tend to do that.

    Best Wishes, Dale D.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The bible is true. There is no doubt about it. Science proves the bible is fact.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I've studied Celtic mythology for some time, with a particular interest in Fomorians, the Tuatha de Danaan, and the Leabhar Gabhala in general... As far as what they did with the children, almost all the references to Fomorians I've ever found name them 'predators'. Taken literally, my first thought was always that they ate them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That might have been the implication and it may have been true. On the other hand, people used to say the Huns ate babies or the Turks ate babies. What is just as likely is that the captives became slaves of the captors. Historically, the Turks did a lot of capturing of foreigners and then incorporating the children of those captives into their society.

    Best Wishes, Dale D.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dale, is there any palentolgical evidence of these double teeth rows as one of my interests is Tarentology (The study of biological deformities).
    I would be inteested to know more indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Don't need to worry about paleontological examples: the phenomenon is well attested enough in living examples (Deformities, under the heading of Teratology) basical all that is necessary is for the individual to retain the milk teeth (Instead of shedding them) while theadult teeth come in alongside the baby teeth. normally this requires a larger than ordinary mouth.

    Best Wishes, Dale D.

    ReplyDelete
  12. So, the giants who went to Northwest Ireland, yet were found between Ohio and Lake Erie... that would suggest this occurred before the land broke apart and Ireland was situated somewhere near Pennsylvanian.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Not exclusively either set on either side of the Atlantic, uyou are misreading and oversimplifying. You are leaving out the important fact that the Megalithic culture is found on both sides of the Atlantic brefore then, and that the "Giant" cultures featuring people with the same type of skull also features the same type of (basically conical) burial mounds on both sides of the Atlantic.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dale, did you find the source of the skull alluded to on the black background?

    ReplyDelete
  15. On the bottom row, left, the one I think you mean has three alternate sources that turn up for me on a quick photo search. One is:
    http://2012.vidin-online.com/world-mysteries/strange-skulls-and-giant-skeletons/
    And another is:
    http://www.aquiziam.com/weird-skull.html
    But that same last page also has some others that are admitted fakes.

    ReplyDelete

This blog does NOT allow anonymous comments. All comments are moderated to filter out abusive and vulgar language and any posts indulging in abusive and insulting language shall be deleted without any further discussion.