Deluge of Atlantis

Deluge of Atlantis
Deluge of Atlantis

Sunday, May 29, 2011

Blogger Still Not Working

Blogger is still malfunctioning and so unfortunately I shall not be able to add any more blog entries until somebody fixes it. I apologise to my readers but there is nothing that can be done at this time.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Transoceanic Contacts Between the Old and New World

TransPacific Type of Chickens, Related to Polynesian Breeds. Below, the Eggs.

[I found this review to be useful in stating the fundamental problems involved in studies in this school of thought. This gives a capsule summary of the problems commonly invoked on either side of the discussion and the outline does indicate something of the extent of contact that has been invoked and which must be dealt with in any complete review of the subject. _Dale D.]

Transoceanic Contacts Between the Old and New World

Indiana University's Harold K. Schneider has most recently argued that any explanation for the rise of America's high civilizations that fails to involve the movement of cultures across the oceans is weak theoretically. 19 Sorenson 1989:110
Historical transoceanic contact before Columbus

Transoceanic contacts between the Old and New World - has it occurred. Did the Phoenicians, the greatest mariners of their time ever make contact with the New World; did the Egyptians come to the Americas and return to their country with New World plants such as tobacco and cocoa leaves. Have the Chinese, or Japanese, or explorers from India set foot in the New World in pre-historic times, leaving behind cultural items such as art symbols, pottery or figurines. Have the Polynesians been here, the Vikings, the Celts?

Considering the monumental achievement of ocean rowers such as Diana Hoff, Tori Murden, Sylvia Cook, Mick Bird, Peter Bird, and John Fairfax, it may, in the interest of seeking the origins of New World civilizations, be worth considering the evidence, for transoceanic voyages from Eurasia to the New World, before Columbus. (see history of oceanrowing) If individuals can navigate the oceans safely, what is the likelihood of organized groups, (governments, financial institutions, etc.) using large sailing vessels, with ample crew and adequate supplies doing the same thing? Or what are the possibilities of ancient sailing vessels being blown off course and forced to follow currents that flow from the Asian mainland to the Americas?

Was the land bridge between Asia and the New World the only way for people to migrate from that continent to the Americans? In light of the successful efforts of a handful of modern day ocean rowers, who battle enormous odds to conquer the vast oceans of the world, it seems only appropriate to give full consideration to the real possibilities that ancient mariners, either by design or accident, arrived in the New World, bringing with them a full assemblage of cultural and social traditions.

Though it may seem appropriate to consider the possibilities, in reality, it rarely happens. The professional journals of archaeology, and anthropology seldom discuss the issues of transoceanic contact, as they're deemed to be of little value. Transoceanic contacts between the Old and New World have never been a serious issue for the professionals.

Although scholarly discussions may not appear in print on a regular basis in professional journals, nevertheless there has been considerable interest in the prospects of transoceanic contacts. Over the years, numerous articles, covering a wide range of cultural topics, and the speculation of how they were transmitted between the Old and New World have been published.

John Sorenson in Guatemala: 1983, Jack Welch the discoverer of Chiasmus in the Book of Mormon stands behind him.
To facilitate the study of the matter, two professional researchers pooled their efforts, and with the aid of computers, searched library data basis for topics and information related to the subject of transoceanic contacts. The two specialists were John L. Sorenson and Martin H. Raish. The results of their efforts is a two volume reference work they entitled: Pre-Columbian Contact with the Americas across the Oceans: An Annotated Bibliography. The bibliography sketch on Sorenson and Raish reads as follows: Sorenson holds a Ph.D. from UCLA in anthropology, in addition to an M.S. from the California Institute of Technology and an M.A. from Brigham Young University. Raish's Ph.D. is in art history, from the University of New Mexico; he also holds an M.A. in art history from the Institute of Fine Arts (NYU), and a Master of Library and Information Science degree from BYU.

In the introduction to their work, they poise this question:

The issue to be addressed we phrase this way: "To what degree were the pre-Columbian American peoples and their cultures dependent on or independent of those in the Old World?"

The introduction then continues as follows:

What became apparent early in looking at what had been written was an obstinate ignorance that has characterized discussion of the subject. We were not surprised that many diffusionists had strong biases and only limited mastery of the sources...(while on the other hand) conventional scholars (non-diffusionists) tended to make sweeping assertions about transoceanic relationships and processes while being only modestly informed about relevant facts, methods or theories.
...Groups are known to us from history to have made successful and culturally significant long-distance movements via oceanic voyaging (for example, the Malayo-Polynesian speakers in Madagascar). Serious scholarship, not the assumptions picked up in graduate school, ought to be employed to learn what such cases tell us that is of general concern to anthropology and archaeology, and then to articulate that knowledge into cultural, geographical and historical theory and method. Yet repeatedly scholars of high repute have used poorly-thought-out (essentially folk) explanations to exorcise the unwelcome proposition of pre-Columbian settlement in America from the Old World. Time and again we have been assured by Americanists that any surviving boatload of people who had crossed the ocean "would have been killed or eaten," without citing a single documented case in support of, let alone against, that quaint nineteenth-century notion.

In discussing the content of the two volumes the authors write:

So all the substantive issues are covered here: the capabilities of ancient vessels and their operation, technologically simple vessels, actual or purported historical maps showing lands, across an ocean, comparative cultural patterns (beliefs, rites, technology, architecture, are motifs, folklore, etc.), language comparisons, human biological characteristics including genetics and diseases, shared cultigens, etc.
Each case in the literature is considered: the Vikings, the Polynesians, the Phoenicians, and so on. The coverage, however, involves much more than assertions by diffusionists. Anti-diffusionist literature is also presented...Meanwhile a great deal of the literature that supposes "land" migrations via the Bering Strait is also listed, for no informed argument for or against sailing across the North Pacific could be shaped in ignorance of it.

All the oceans bordering the Americas and all time periods are considered. While crossings before, say, the Bronze Age, seem unlikely, who can say that for certain, considering the settling of Australia and Neolithic Britain? One special case that may strike some as not "transoceanic" has been included for enlightening comparison. This concerns movements between Mesoamerica and Pacific coastal South America. Since such movements are now commonly supposed to have involved voyages of as much as 2,000 miles which may have sailed hundreds of miles out of sight of land, we may be instructed epistemologically, methodologically, and theoretically by opening the literature on this case to general view...

In their closing remarks, the authors note:

It is likely that the technological capacity for transoceanic voyaging has been available at a number of possible departure points in the Old World fairly often in the past. It seems to us both plausible and probable that numerous voyages did cross the oceans and in several places. Furthermore, available evidence from cultural, natural scientific, physical anthropological, linguistic and other studies can be plausibly mustered to support this view. More serious studies on most of these matters are called for than have been done in the recent past, and the relevant disciplines ought to welcome such investigations. Sorenson/Raish 1990: introduction
The following are a random sampling of abstracts and articles that appear alphabetically in the two volume work:

AUTHOR: Brown, John Macmilian
DATE: 1918
TITLE: Languages of the Pacific
IN: Bernice P. Bishop Museum Occasional Papers 7

Page 18: He finds a small percentage of Quichua (Mayan) words or roots in Polynesian as well as in Japanese, along with grammatical similarities.

AUTHOR: Carter, George F.
DATE: 1971a
TITLE: Pre-Columbian Chickens in America
IN: Man Across the Sea: Problems of Pre-Columbian Contacts, edited by Carroll L. Riley, et al., pages 178-218, University of Texas Press: Austin

Chickens were too widely dispersed too soon after 1492 to have been introduced to South America by the Spaniards. When Spanish explorers reached the Andes, the fowl was already there, known by a name similar to an Asian word for chicken. Other name similarities are adduced. Chickens were also in the Amazon Basin before Europeans...His conclusion is that the evidence is stronger for Asian pre-Columbian introduction than for (merely) Spanish and Portuguese introduction.

AUTHOR: Carter, George F.
DATE: 1976b
TITLE: Chinese Contacts with America: Fu-Sang Again
IN: Anthropological Journal of Canada 14 (1) :10-2

"Here I reopen the question of pre-Columbian contacts of the Chinese with America." Recaps the Fu-sang tradition. Gives in a table, names for water craft which may show relationships between Asia and America. Lists over 30 parallels between China and America cited by Needham 1971. Describes two Asiatic bronze figures from Peru, as told by Patron 1908. Cites a claim that one 19th century Peruvian village could understand Chinese.

Shows also characters on a stela in Peru which compare closely to Chinese and Annamese characters that are part of a readable magical spell. Carter sent photographs on one of the Peruvian statues to Dr. Shen-shun Ling in Taipei who replied that the characters shown wee unquestionably Chinese of c. AD 500...Yupa Indians of Venezuela have a high proportion of a blood transferrin only found in the Chinese (Arends and Gallango 1964). The cultural isolationist view held by many professional Americanists should be broken down and would be if they had broader knowledge. "

AUTHOR: Chadwick, Robert E. Lee Jr.
DATE: (c. 1975)
TITLE: Toward a Theory of Trans-Atlantic Diffusion
UNPUBLISHED: typescript, 82 pages (in Harold B. Lee Library, BYU)

Presents evidence showing that probably there were several transatlantic incursions to the New World prior to European contact in the 15th century. Two fundamental archaeological traits for these are the shoe-shaped pot or patojo and the stirrup-spouted vessel. Evidence from physical anthropology includes intrusive brachycephalic persons and the practices of trephination and cranial deformation...Supporting ethnohistorical evidence is taken from Mexican and Peruvian chronicles of the 16th century. This complex he takes to represent an intrusive "prospector culture," indicated by the features mentioned plus shaft tombs and other rare burial types, in addition to the first appearance of metallurgy in an area with a Quetzalcoatl deity.

He finds many parallels between his prospector group in the New World...and the Bell-Beaker copper-prospecting people in Europe and North Africa. Proposes at least two Atlantic crossing, c. 2,000 BC and 500 BC not ruling out Pacific crossing(s) as well.

AUTHOR: Ekholm, Gordon F.
DATE: 1964a
TITLE: The Possible Chinese Origin of Teotihuacan Cylindrical Tripod Pottery and Certain Related Traits
IMPRINT: Proceedings of the 35th International Congress of Americanisms (Mexico, 1962), pages 39-45

In a sober and cautiously worded essay, the author suggests that a limited amount of cultural transfer occurred during the Han dynasty to coeval Early Classic Teotihuacan and could have played a role in the shaping of New World cultures. Similarities are evident in the occurrence of flat-bottomed, cylindrical tripod vessels with square molded legs, conical covers by birds, and horizontally arranged decoration. Other traits of possible outside origin include carved slate and pyrite mirrors, fresco decoration, wheeled figurines, and the use of molds.

AUTHOR: Heine-Geldern, Robert von
DATE: 1964a
TITLE: Traces of Indian and southeast Asiatic Hindu-Buddhist Influences in Mesoamerica
IN: Proceedings of the 35th Int'l Congress of Americanists (Mexico, 1962), 1:47-54

Indian sailors could learn about America from the Chinese in Southeast Asia, whose Trans-Pacific voyages continued into Han times, at which time the Hindus colonized Southeast Asia. Large four-masted ships possessed by the Indians at the time made crossing the Pacific perfectly feasible, citing Palliot 1920. Amaravati, India, was particularly important in the colonization of Southeast Asia, thus making sensible the relation of lotus friezes of second century Amaravati with water-lily friezes of Chichen Itza...

Wheeled animal figurines show an even more likely link; they have been popular in India from the third millennium BC to the present. "The independent invention of wheeled miniature objects in a country where the wheel was unknown is, of course, extremely improbable."

In summary, there were more or less constant relations from Southeast Asia to America from about the second to the ninth or tenth century. There is no indication of large-scale immigration, conquest, or agricultural settlements.

AUTHOR: Ibarra Grasso, Dick Edgar
DATE: 1982
TITLE: America en la prehistoria mundial: difusion greco-fenicia
(America in World Prehistory: Greco-Phoenician Diffusion)
IMPRINT: Tipografica Editora Argentina: Buenos Aires

His historical summary (page 401) recognizes at least five transoceanic movements:

(1) A little before 3,000 BC relations with Indonesia are manifest on the coast of Ecuador and perhaps western Mexico, including cultural traits originating in Bronze Age Sumeria, India and Indochina; Meggers and company are wrong in supposing a Japan source for this influence, rather it came from Indonesia via the counter-euqatorial current while simultaneously reaching Jomon Japan.

(2) Since at least 1800 BC, and intensifying around 1500 on the coasts of Ecuador and northern Peru, traits from Mesopotamia, Elam and India appear, and when studied more, western Mexico will likely show similar features. From 1000-700 B.C. (Chavin) a new wave of influence from the same source(s) can be seen.

(3) Around 500 B.C. intense new influences, including migrations, reach Mesoamerica, yielding the Late Preclassic. while Mesoamerica did not then receive metallurgy, many copies of metal objects in other materials exist, but in Ecuador and Peru full metallurgy was received, possibly from Phoenicians and Greeks. Toward the end of this period the first Hindu and Chinese influences arrive, seen among the Olmecs and then the Mayas.

(4) One or two centuries before our era, a Hellenistic scientific mission must have moved along the coasts of both Mesoamerica and the Andean area introducing advanced astronomical and calendrical concepts, a geocentric view of the universe, 20-unit counting system, etc.

(5) Around AD 500 a reverse flow of American culture of Mayan origin, reached Indochina, carrying especially the false arch, tri-foliate-form portals, knowledge of zero, and other cultural traits which then diffused on to India and to Europe.

There are close to 6,000 entries in the two volumes and the synopsis of each article is fascinating to read. It shows that there has been much discussion and considerable research into the origin of civilization in the Americas before Columbus, and much of it centers on transoceanic contacts versus supposed travel over the Bering Strait land bridge.

[By my estimation, the latest set of listed voyages seriously undersetimates the connections between Mexico and India in the Tlatilco period, which is indicated but not made to start soon enough and not allowed a large enough standard-Hindu diffusion. At the time in question the migrants were already worshipping Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma and the mythology continued foreward from that: Brahma eventually became HunabKu and so on. Furthermore there was a two-way traffic in various domesticated plants including beans, cotton, tomatoes, chile peppers, coconuts and even bringing prickly pear cactus back to India as fodder for use in the drier regions. Furthermore some very unusual things were transported at the same time, such as the use of cochneal, made from the crushed bodies of small insects. It is good that the authors recognise two-way transpacific contact but in fact it must have been deliberate and ongoing for most of the period of 500 BC to AD 500, and building on even older contacts. It is also useful to note that the "Latest Bering Sea Crossings" must necessarily be postglacial and some authorities even allow that contact between East Asia and North America must have been ongoing in the 1st and 2nd millenia BC. Naturally I shall have to produce the documentation for these things in future postings as time allows. -- Best Wishes, Dale D.]

Thursday, May 19, 2011

New At The Zoo

Two articles of some interest are posted at the Frontiers of Zoology blog this morning: One a reprint about the Japanese Hibagon, featuring a highly unusual and unpublicized artefact:

And the other about a rethinking of Neanderthalers:

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Sunday, May 15, 2011

More Connections Between Ancient India and Mexico

In the book Remedy the Frauds in Hinduism, Indian historian Purushothoma Chon mentioned that the Nagas of Tibet even had a similar bar and dot counting system to the Mayas of Mesoamerica, along with the same names for the place values. The use of a symbol for zero occurs in both sets of numerals, almost exclusively out of all the world's mathematical systems (in Mesopotamia a blank space was left to covey the idea of zero)

The Astrological system of the Mayans was also stated to be derived from an Indian original and with similar names to the same signs. I shall have to make a longer discussion of this in the future since I have the material in xeroxes in my files but currently no way to put up scans on the blog.

Here is a section from a recent blog which I thought was relevant to the matter of transPacific diffusion of culture between ancient India and the Mayans of the New World:

Maya Civilization of Mexico. Baffling Links with Ancient IndiaBy Anand Sharma
May 11, 2011

[...passing down to the second half for the pertinent info I wanted to mention]
There are two specific archaeological discoveries pertaining to 761 AD, about which
most Mexican historians are silent, that attract our attention as possible links of Maya civilization to ancient India. The first one is a wall panel (Panel No. 3 of Temple 0-13, at Piedras Negras, Guatemala; reproduced as Plate 69, page 343 of 'The Ancient Maya' by S.G. Morley) belonging to the Later Classic Stage of Mexican history, associated with the peaking of Maya architecture and sculpture. Mexican historians have not given any interpretation of this panel. It appears that the scene depicted in the panel relates to the great Indian epic 'Ramayana'. [Emphasis added-DD] It shows a king sitting on the throne and one maidservant with two children standing on the right side of the throne. A guard stands behind the three. On the other side of the king,
three important personages are standing whereas the vassal chiefs and important feudatories are sitting in front of the throne. The king on the throne is believed to be Suryavanshi Ram with his three illustrious brothers standing by his side. The two little children are his two sons with a maid and a guard behind them. Amongst the three persons on the right, two are engaged in a discussion whereas the third one, apparently Lakshman, is standing with a bold, brave and confident demeanour which was characteristic of him. The above panel is a beautiful piece of sculpture and an evidence of great Mayan heritage, their artistic taste and superior creative ability and, above all, an archaeological evidence to prove India's link with Mexico in the 8th century at least.

The artistic design and postures of the figures carved can be compared to those found at Ajanta and Ellora caves in India. This interpretation, however, remains only a plausible one till the hieroglyphics and frescoes surrounding the wall panel are deciphered.

Another archaeological discovery at the same place i.e. Piedras Negras, Guatemala, is a stone stela (No. 12, Plate No. 18, page 61 of 'The Ancient Maya' by S.G. Morley). A mythological scene has been carved in this stela, depicting the architectural and artistic maturity of the Maya people of the Classic Stage (594 - 889 AD).

There is a beautiful image of a deity with eight hands (ashtabhuja). The art style is discernibly Indian as in no other religion of the world deities of this type were worshipped. It may be mentioned that the ruling dynasty of Mexico at the time of the conquest by Spaniards was 'Aztec' or Ashtak (Eight). The evidence in the form of such images leaves little doubt about the presence of Indian culture amongst the ancient Mexicans. The stela pertains to the period of more than eight centuries before Columbus set foot on the soil of the so-called New World.

The place where these pieces have been discovered - Piedras Negras - appears to
be a distorted form of 'Priyadarsh Nagraj' in Sanskrit, as has been the case with so
many words distorted by European pronunciation.

These stone sculptures are adornments of a Mayan temple and depict some popular mythology prevalent amongst the people of the time. Both human sacrifice
and idolatry were much in practice amongst Maya people. Morley has given a
detailed and vivid account of Maya culture and society in his book 'The Ancient
Maya', profusely quoting Bishop Diego de Landa.

Bishop Landa states that Maya people "…had a very great number of idols and
temples which were magnificent in their own fashion and besides the community
temples, the lords, priests and leading men also had oratories and idols in their houses where they made their prayers and offerings in private". Not only of gods but idols of even animals and insects were prepared by Maya people, who believed in immortality of soul and afterlife. This definitely smacks of an Indian connection.

More serious efforts to connect the ancient American civilizations with those of ancient India have to be made. The Trans-Pacific contacts of the people of south-east Asia with the people of ancient America have been established beyond doubt. It is also a well-proven fact of history that Indians of ancient times were great sea-farers. In pre-Mahabharata era as well as in the subsequent period,
the kings of southern India possessed large fleets used for trade with the Arabian and European countries where Indian merchandise was much in demand. India's links with south-east Asia and other far-off islands of the Pacific Ocean are an established fact of history. The conquest of Malaya by Rajendra Chola, the story of
Buddhagupta the Great Sailor (Mahanavik), the religious expeditions of Indians to preach the gospel of Buddhism in the distant lands of Cambodia, Annam, Bali, Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Japan, Korea, Mongolia and China are proofs of the impact
of Indian culture.

A remarkable feature of the Indian culture has been that colonial domination was never identified with economic exploitation. The Buddhist Jatakas (folk tales) narrate many stories relating to maritime adventures and daring sea journeys which establish that such activities were an essential part of Indian life at that time.

[The author is a historian settled in Vienna. ]
A previous discussion from Viewzone is now at the URL

-Which however makes some statements which I find not only misleading but potentially very harmful and which I do not choose to deal with at this time, involving traditions of the Iranians and Turanians (Aryans and the Turks), both ethnic labels that have been badly misused in the past and must be handled most carefully by modern researchers in order to keep out of some extremely nasty associations. However, the parts which I wanted to mention do not directly involve those matters.

Who Brought The Mayans To Mexico?or
Were the ancient Turks, Akkads (Sumerians) and Dravidians (Tamils) the parents of Mexico and Meso-America?

By Gene D. Matlock


The time is about 1,500 BC.[and onward until approximately 500 BC-DD] A fleet of Tamil ships in some harbor of the Konkan or Kankon, a beautiful white sand coastline stretching from today a­s Maharasthra to the southern tip of Western India, raises anchor and sails south to what is now the large island nation of Ceylon (today a­s Sri Lanka). Their goal is to sail to Patala or what is now Mexico and Meso-America, leaving emigrant settlers there. During their stay in Ceylon, they recruit skilled stone workers, skilled craftsmen, and temple builders in the province of Maya, to build a new Tamil civilization over or alongside an Akkad-type (Sumerian) civilization that was already in Meso-America: that of the Olmecs or Olman.

Zikari at Konkan

The ancient Tamils were international traders and colonizers. Wherever they went in the world, they left an unmistakable imprint of their presence, such as place names, foods, games, and temple buildings. Their temple buildings were usually zikharis (tiered or pyramidical temple platforms). Often, small entrances or temples were located on each tier, but not always. On the top tier, there was always a temple. On top if it often stood an ornate rectangular steeple. However, circular domes or single spires often stood on top of the temple as well. Zikharis usually varied in appearance, according to the Dravidian or Tamil-derived cultures of the host nations. But one thing never changed: the unmistakable presence of Tamil influence.

[So far so good, as far as what is stated plainly. The problem comes in the next section with national and ethnic identities which I shall pass over for the reasons I have indicated-DD]


I am now ready to return to the hypothetical voyage of Tamils to America. They probably used two types of maps. The map below-left shows Mt. Meru with petals pointing in four directions. The left petal points toward a distant land called Ketumal or Chetumal. In order to reach that land, they had to go eastward in order to avoid sailing around the tip of Africa. They knew where they were going, for they had been there before! The map below-right was their own map of the world.

The Mayans said that the land of their forefathers lay 150 days westward.[?]

When the Tamils arrived in North America, they crossed over to what is now the Caribbean Sea, through the Isthmus of Panama (The Great Crossing). After coming out the other side, they docked in the safe harbor of Chetumal. It still bears the same name. Chetumal harbor is in Belize. Belize derives from Belisha (God Shiva).

Later, they left Chetumal, sailing up the coast to a place reminding them of the beauty of their old home in Konkan. They dropped anchor and made their first home in America there. Not surprisingly, they decided to name their new home Kankun (Cancun). After thousands of years, the last syllable has barely changed in pronunciation.

When the Tamils settled in Yucatan, they built their typical zikharis, such as those of Tikal and Palenque. At Tikal, they stained their stone monuments a reddish color, just as they had done back in the Konkan.

People are surprised to see stone images of elephants in Mayan country, such as the following one in Copan. It may be a reminder of the elephants in India.

Right: Stone engraving [Stela-DD] of a Hindu mahout, complete with turban, riding on the head of an elephant. Some authorities, who do not agree with me that the Mayans came from abroad, think Southern Mexico once had elephants. The truth is that they worshiped a long-nosed god (Chac) or elephant, just as the Hindu Tamils worshiped the elephant-headed Ganesha in India. [The author missed out on Indra, the obvious Indian deity most like the Thunder-gods, and a deity mounted on an elephant-DD]

Chak was the long-nosed Mayan God of thunder, lightning, rain, and crops. His elephantine trunk sprayed water on the earth. His equivalent in other parts of the world was Zeus, Dyaus, Jupiter, Ca, Jah, Ju, Jahve, Jehova Jeho, Sakh, Sagg, Sa-ga-ga, Sakko, Zagg, Zax. a.k.a. Zeus, is often depicted holding a serpentine thunderbolt and a grail, or someone is handing it to him. The Mayan Chak is equally depicted.

[There is also good evidence that the Ceylonese people in this instance are related to the South Indians, who had a similar language and similar names: and a longstanding confusion exists whereby Sumatra gets called by the names for Ceylon. In my point of view these things do not count against the theory because I do not require that Ceylon specifically be the origin for the migration, only that it is the center of a cultural area from which the colonists came. That Sumatra is also called by the same nammes as Ceylon merely indicates the route by which ancient peoples travelled. The Romans for example seem to have meant Sumatra where they said Taprobane-DD]
They gave several names that directly and indirectly identified Ceylon: Shilanka (Xilanca) - an ancient name of Ceylon (Zeilan-Ka).

Shikalanka (Xicalanca) - Ceylon. In Tamil, Shikalam.

Itzamna was one of their culture heroes. He claimed to have come from a western country. Isham, meaning 'Tiger, ""Land of Gold," was a Dravidian name of Ceylon. The Na in Isham-na is an honorific.

Ishbalanka (Xbalanca), another culture hero. In Tamil, it means "Shiva of Lanka." India's God Shiva was supposed to have made the footprint on top of Adam's Peak in today's Sri Lanka. {Shiva is DEFINITELY known to have been a God worshipped in the Indus Valley civilisation-and as one of a trinity also-DD]

Shibalba, The Mayan underworld. This word stems From the Sanskrit Shivulba, meaning from the fountainhead of God Shiva-Mt. Meru, in India.

Palenke (Palenque). This name derives from the Tamil Pal-Lanka, meaning "Protectorate of Lanka." Ancient Lanka was India's Atlantis.
[Evidently the name Lanka is a version of the name Atlantis. This is not really so odd as it seems because there are dozens of other locations around the Atlantic Ocean supposedly called after Atlantis, according to Charles Berlitz, including more than one place called Atlan in Mesoamerica-DD]

The Yaxilan (Yakshilan) Mayan ruins. This name means ìThe Ceylon Yakhsî in Sanskrit.

Ceren, a name of Ceylon. Some Mayan ruins in El Salvador are called Ceren.

Lacandon, a tribe of Yucatan. India's god Kubera banished the Laks, a Tartarian Huna or Rakshasha tribe from Northern India to Ceylon, giving the country one of its many names and becoming the Lakan or Lakam people. The Don in Lacan-don derives from Dan (Tannu or Dannu?). (See the online Cologne Sanskrit and Tamil dictionaries for comparison of ancient Ceylon names with those of Mayan tribes and places.)

Ancient Ceylon was divided into three provinces: Maya, the central division of the island; Ruhuna (Soul of Huna Land), and Pihitee, the northernmost of the three. The Ceylonese Maya were known for their impressive astronomical knowledge, architectural marvels, temples, and irrigation ponds. (Reference: The History of Ceylon, by William Knighton, first published in Colombo Ceylon, in 1845.)

One of the names of Ceylon's cult religions was Mayon. It still exists among a few aboriginals living on the island.

Most of the Rakshasa and Pisaca bad boys were Tartarian Hunas, They came from Huna-Bhu, meaning Hunas (Tartars) from the Sacred Land around Mt. Meru. Many of these tribes were cannibalistic, given to intertribal fighting, practitioners of human sacrifice in their religious rites, flattened the foreheads of their babies, took scalps in battle, and observed other customs attributed to many Amerindian tribes. The Mayans remember them as the culture hero, Hunapu (Huna-Bhu?).

Had the natives of Meso-America been able to pronounce the "ST" combination, today's Yucatan would be Yucasthan (Yakhuthan?). Even today, many Mexican Indians and peasants cannot pronounce this combination. For example, instead of CÛmo est·? (How are you?), they can only say, "CÛmo 't·?"

Guatemala derives from Sanskrit Guadhaamala, meaning Guha (Cosmic Intelligence) + Dha (Serpentine) + Amala (Umbilical Cord), the Sacred Umbilical Cord Linking Western Asia and India with Meso-America. Besides the Ceylonese and Tamil tribal names Yakkha, Maya, and Lak in Maya country, there are also the Lenca and Rama tribes. The Mayan lowlands are even called Guanacaste, meaning The Western Enlightened Nagas. It is assumed that the Olmecs spoke Nahuatl because of the place-names they left behind. The Olmecs called the Maya country in Southeastern Veracruz, Coatzacoalcos (Snake Sanctuary). Snake Sanctuary was none other than the home of the Western or American Nagas.

Originally, the Asuras or Nagas were not only a civilized people, but a maritime power,Kadru, the mother of serpents, compelled Garuda (the Eagle or Hawk) to serve her sons by transporting them across the sea to a beautiful land, which was inhabited by Nagas. The Asuras (Nagas) were expert navigators who possessed very considerable naval resources and had founded upon distant coasts. (The Encircled Serpent by M. Oldfield, p. 47.)

Even today, the Mexican flag has an Eagle with a serpent in its mouth, representing the arrival of the ancient Mexicans to Meso-America. It also represents the arrival of the Meshika to what is now Mexico City.

The Tamils and all the tribes of Meso-America, from Mexico to Panama, played the same board game: Pachesi. The Meso-Americans called it by a linguistically similar name: Patolli. (Note: CH and T are linguistically similar. LL was the only way the Renaissance Spaniards could approximate the sounds of Z and J. This proves that Patolli derived from Pachesi.) I myself saw a Patolli board game at the National Museum of Costa Rica, in San Jose.

[Above Left: Mr. Subash Bose displays an ancient Tamil Pachesi board kept as a relic in the temple of his area. The Tamils and all the tribes of Meso-America, from Mexico to Panama, played the same board game: Pachesi. Right
: The Meso-Americans called it by a linguistically similar name: Patolli. (Note: CH and T are linguistically similar. LL was the only way the Renaissance Spaniards could approximate the sounds of Z and J. This proves that Patolli derived from Pachesi.) I myself saw a Patolli board game at the National Museum of Costa Rica, in San Jose.]

The Tamils and Turks even gave some of their favorite dishes to the ancient Mexicans, and with the same names! I will name just two of them: Tamales and Corundas. The ancient Tamils were known as Tamils or Tamals. One of their favorite foods was a type of paste or filling wrapped in bamboo husk. Even in Tamil Nadu it is called Tamal. The Michoacanos have a similar triangular shaped tamal called Corunda. In Turkic it would be kur-unda (Turkic dough).
[There is also an Indian word related to the English word "Soup":in Peru a very similar word is pronounced "Chupay." And many Quechua words can be related to Sanscrit originals including the names llama (lamb), alpaca and guanaco (similar to a Sanscrit word meaning "Gazelle." That will of course form the basis for a separate discussion)-DD]

My Tamil Nadu friend, Mr. Subash Bose, pointed out to me the fact that Hindus often worship cobras and that the Mayans worshipped rattlesnakes. He said that Mayan huts look exactly like those in Tamil Nadu.

The Kuberas even gave their name to North America. The Meso-Americans told the Spaniards that North America was Quivira (Land of the Khyber People).

Most of us have heard of the Mayan holy book, Chilam Balam. Chilan or Chilam is a title of Mayan priests. Balam is the Mayan name for Jaguar. In Sanskrit, Cheilan = Ceylonese and Vyalam = tiger; lion; hunting leopard. Jaguar probably stems from the Sanskrit Higkara, meaning Tiger-like or sounding like a tiger.

....The presence of Dravidian, Turkic, and Sanskrit words in America shouldn'­t surprise anyone, for the Aryans and Indians (Ramanaka) traveled together throughout the world. In his book, El Origen de los Indios, the Spanish priest, Gregorio Perez, wrote that the Caribbean Indians said that their founding fathers were the Kuru-Rumani.

Some Dravidians think Sanskrit sprang from Dravidian, but my research does not indicate this...[On the other hand, there is a general agreement among scholars that the Dravidians were the people who had created the Indus Valley civilzation and they were at that time in control of nearly all the rest of India-DD]
In this article, I have just presented a tiny part of the evidence in my possession, pointing to the Indian and Ceylonese origins of the Mayans. I have decided to end this article by recounting what the Jesuit priest Francisco Xavier Clavigero wrote in Volume I of his Historia Antigua de Messico (Ancient History of Mexico). Clavigero said that the Chiapaneco Mayans told him that a grandson of Noah, Votan, took people to people America. He was from the Chan (Naga or Serpent) tribe. They said that he came from the East, bringing seven groups with him. Two other leaders (Groups?) had also previously brought in settlers: Igh and Imox. He built a great city, now known as Palenque, call Nauchan, meaning City of the Serpents. When Noah emerged from the Ark, he and his people built their first city, calling it Nashan (The Noachide Chan).

Votan founded three tributary monarchies called Tulan, Mayapan, and Chiquimala. The ruins of Tulan are those of Tula, Hidalgo, Mexico. Mayapan is the Yucatan peninsula itself. I have not yet located the region of Chiquimala. Perhaps it is Guatemala or the Mayan province of Tzequil.

Like many Europoids ignorant of India and its history, Clavigero tried to place them in Cartagena, Africa, Rome, and even Spain...Had he been more knowledgeable about ancient India and Ceylon, he would have known that they were Ceylonese, for in Tamil, VALAM POTAM means Place of Boats. Valam Potan (Ceylon) was located between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn, where the trade winds are. The differences between Valum Votan and Valam Potam are trivial.

Notice the following map showing the sea and land routes of the ancient Tamils. Below it, you'll notice the words Oceanus Indicus (Indian Ocean). The ancient maps which the Spaniards used to get to America showed the same terms: Mar Indica; Oceanus Indica. From where did they obtain those maps showing that the eastern end of Oceanus Indica was America? [A: the name is a Roman name and this map is a map of trade routes in Roman times. The Spanish have a Latin heritage. That one was easy-DD]

[On the other hand this map is a good indication of how far these peoples were KNOWN to have gotten around BEFORE Roman Times, since they were using pre=existing trade routes-DD]

The stone heads staring at the sea, from the shores of Easter Island, tell us a lot about the ancient sailors they'­re supposed to represent. Notice their [red-topknot]headpieces. Could they be Tamil turbans?

Friday, May 13, 2011

Technical Errors

Currently and for the past several days running, Blogger has been dealing with technical issues. Part of their dealing with the problem has resulted in turning off the blog postings for the duration.

Posting should resume normally over the weekend and the blogs will have normal service again. We apologise for any inconvenience this might cause to our readers.

Best Wishes, Dale D.

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Tartessos, the Current "Atlantis" in Spain Project

Here are some of the recent computer-generated survey images of the lost city of Tartessos in Spain, currently back in the news as the "real Atlantis." They look very encouraging but it must be repeated these are only simulations, and the Atlantis theorists have produced dozens if not hundreds of similar charts for "Their" pet-theory Atlantises the whole world over.

This is actually not a new theory since it is the theory favoured by L. Sprague DeCamp in his definitive book Lost Continents. However, up until quite recently, all the experts could do was to say that there used to be a city there and they had next to no artefacts from the site. It became possible for some Phoenician chauvenists to say that it wactually only a Phoenician colony, in the absence of better evidence (this is quite wrong but you will see it being reported endlessly. Actually, Tartessos was at the heart of Megalithic culture and the Atlantic Bronze age, a cultural sphere of influence entirely separate from Phoenicia and in operation before the Phoenicians ever got that far)

Hover, essentially there is still only conjecture on the matter rather than any good direct evidence. And the reports that it actually IS Atlantis would seem to be premature (several authorities on Atlantis are quite willing to say it is a colony and a replication of an earlier Atlantis now submerged in the ocean)

That Tartessos had such a city plan is entirely possible. But it is not the first or the last of such similar structures. There are other examples that are older and they could all be copies of one original greater source. One of these circle-cities has been suggested to be at the floor of the Atlantic South of the Azores and I have put that example on an earlier blog. The pattern of making settlements with multiple walls and moats goes back to the very beginning of city planning: the Roman name for city, "Urbs" even comes from the same root as "Orb", that is, Formed in a Circle.

The pattern of concentric circles is common in all Megalithic cultures the whole world over. Oftentimes it is said to represent an Omphalos or The Navel of the World. The design starts showing up in Rock art at the end of the Ice age and settlements in this pattern are almost that old. One of the first and oldest examples we have of artificial concentric-circle structures is actually Stonehenge, over 8000 years ago as measured by Carbon-14 dating.. That too has been posted here in earlier blog entries.

And the Atlantis-in-Spain articles often add this "reconstruction" of the "City of Atlantis" which is also quite fanciful. The Classical Architecture is quite out of place. All the evidence we have favours the Atlantic cultural complex as using Megalithic, large-stone building. It is somewhat traditional to think of Plato's Atlantis as looking like the Athens he was familiar with, but Plato himself distinctly denied such an idea. He called the buildings "Outlandish" and "Barbaric"

Best Wishes, Dale D.