>They whorship same Gods and use the same language what else we need to accept that they are a nation?

---Let me put it plainly: The invading Hellenes adapted virtually all the autochtone divinities in the Aegean region, as a result of cultural merger.
They did not use the same language. They did probably not look, act or think the same.
You should rather take pride in your Minoan NON-GREEK heritage, as it is likely to represent a majority of your genes if you reckon yourself as Greek. Why not accept the term Greek as a blend of peoples who arrived prior to the Bronze Age and peoples who arrived as the Iron Age began?
Some places, these peoples did not mix well. Read up on why the Messenians tended to revolt against their foreign opressors, better known as Spartans.
Even today there are enclaves of non-greek speakers in remote places, both in the Aegean and on the mainland.
I regret to inform you that most of these are speakers of what is considered dialects of (the in Greece fiercely hated-) Albanian. This is the case also in Italy, and mind you: - NOT as a result of recent migrations.
To define all this as one nation sounds plainly nationalistic. Do you think it less desirable to allow the possiblity that the present Greeks have a complex and interesting background?

>Linear A and B have many similarities and maybe you are right Linear A is written in code ,but I have more chances to be Greek than any other known language.

---First of all, I absolutely do NOT think linear A was written in in code. As to the similarities, they would be because the Achaeans adapted the script of Linear A to use for the new language.
- More ore less same writing, yes, but different language.

If you wish to discuss this further, I advice you to visit the discussion forum on the Aegaeanet pages, and get answers from specialists like John Younger and Bjarte Kaldhoel. These are closer to decifering Linear A than any of us.

>the occupation of a stronghold is not an invasion (I think )

---It is not necessarily a large scale invasion to do so, but if you focus on intensions, it is not correct to say that there was no hostile Egyptian military presence in the Aegean.

>The Pelasgians are a great mystery ,I believe that both we agree that the Pelasgians were the inhabitants of present Greece,I claim that they are related to Greeks you don't.

---What do You base this claim on?

>I am talking about 400.000 years ……(I don't say that Greeks were present that time but they kept memories )

---Memories from 400.000 years ago? Do you mean to say that Greeks can trace a direct lineage from the Homo Heidelbergensis? Those creatures would scare the daylight even out of our cousins, the much later Homo Sapiens Neandertalensis.
Or did they keep memories from other animals? Why did you not say - for example - 16 000 BC, when the sea-level may have been lower than today? Why did you pick a date 300.000 years before the birth of 'the mythocondial Eve'? Are you sure you did not mean 40.000 years ago, as there are no evidence of anatomically modern humans in Europe prior to this?

>Trond you agree with many of my claims but I haven't read your claim ,it is not enough to disagree ,I want your opinion.

---My opinion is that Greeks are the result of a mix between more than one nation, that most of the language is Indo-European, and that the term Greek is confusing to use if you speak of the time before 1000 BC. All evidence indicates that there was a population in the Aegean prior to the introduction of a proto-greek language. The result of this is what we now call Greek.

Call them Minoans, Aegeans, Pelasgians, Barbaroi, Bebryces, Palasat, Messenians, Euboeans, Chalchidic, Cycladic or what you will, but please do not just call them Greek.
To simplify this, it is better to choose a constructed word like Evans did: Minoans.
Or, alternatively, you may choose not to simplify it.

I hereby repeat my previous statement that the Greek nation has plenty to pride herself in. Also the heritage built on the shoulders of other nations. Who is more 'Minoan' TODAY than the Greeks?

Concerning Atlantis and its relation to 'Minoans', I would not resist theories of close contact between them.
Canaanites were in close contact with Cypriot 'Minoans', and also in the Aegean.
What is interesting here:
- Who was an exponent of a maritime trading culture in this region prior to 1200 BC?
I would say: Not greeks. Minoans certainly. Canaanites propably. I would personally hesitate to reckon Atlanteans as either of these.

This thread: Was Atlantis a Phoenician city?
Carthage is reckoned as Punic city, and its harbour appears to be based on the same concept as Plato's description.
Moreover, the name Carthage could derive from Qart Hadasht, meaning in canaanite something like 'New City', or in Greek: 'Nea Polis'.
Erick, do you think the 'old city' is the city in question?
And Perseus: What do you make of the name Charchedon? Why would the greeks call it by this name?

With friendly regards,

This issue (Ahhiyawa) is commonly said to mean that Achaeans (who seem to be Greeks) were meddling seriously in the affairs of Asia minor during roughly 1310-1250 BC.

Greek myths brag about this connection when they discuss Proetus and Bellerophon, both of whom are said to have sojurned in the land which Greeks called Lycia (the Hittites called it Lucca). The Mythical Chronology page of Carlos Parada's mythology website sets a time shortly after 1300 BC for the (mythical) Greek characters of Proetus and Bellerophon.

Furthermore, Greek mythology claims that Agenor had used Phoenician intermediaries to establish his son Cilix as king of Cilicia arund 1450 BC. (Hittite vocabulary uses the name Kizzuatna instead of Cilicia.)

The Hittite kings of that era had to move their primary residence to the Taurus mountains near Cilicia (in a city named Tarhuntassa), due to the revolts in Cilicia and Lycia. Eventually the region of Kizzuwatna (=Cilicia) was ruled by a woman who married the king of the Hittites. And the Greek hero Bellerophon led a military expedition into Cilicia at roughly that time.

quote from: http://www.bartleby.com/67/113.html
"Muwatallis (c. 1310–1280) inherited a powerful, well-organized empire from his father, but Ramses II was ambitious to regain Egypt's Syrian possessions and the inevitable battle was fought at Qadesh on the Orontes in 1286 (See 1305–1186). Ramses claimed a victory but probably falsely, as Muwatallis continued his advance as far as Damascus, and the Hittites retained firm control of northern Syria. During the king's absence in Syria, the Kaska again sacked Hattusas, and, perhaps as a result, Muwatillis moved his official residence to Tarhuntassa, somewhere in the Taurus Mountains. Urhiteshup (c. 1280), Muwatallis's oldest son by a royal concubine, was shortly deposed by his uncle Hattusilis III (c. 1280–1250). In 1270, Hattusilis signed an important treaty with Ramses II, setting a boundary between the Hittite and Egyptian Empires. The treaty was probably made to counter the growing threat of Assyria under Shalmeneser I (See 1365–1078). Hattusilis married Puduhepa, the daughter of a Hurrian priest from Kizzuwatna, and the couple issued edicts jointly."
endquote

here's my second post,
the firs tried to open a new topic while this one is the nearest to what i'm putting right now on the table.

Did anybody of you had a look to the interesting theory and book of
italian reporter Sergio Frau: "Le Colonne D'Ercole" (The pillars of Hercules")?
May be there is not an english version.
Visit and translate by yourselves the www.colonnedercole.it website.
I think that everything is there well explained.

Some suggestions from that book:

1) Atlantis and the "sea peoples" coalition are mostly the same thing.
2) The western mediterranean sea was the "true ocean" before Hellenes were comfortable to seal through the straits around Sicily.
3) The geographical separation between western and eastern mediterannean was, after Atlantis times, defined in the Greek/Phoenician geopolitical division.
4) Hellenistic and post-classic re-setting of geographics (topographics) and history brought the mediterranean profile that we today know: hercules pillars at Gibraltair and so on.

If you like correct and/but open-mind investigation that book is for you, you will have the feeling of directly discussing with Diodore, Herodotus and the rest of the bunch.

If you will need I can may be post some translation from italian to english (plain euro-continental simplified english)

Bye Bye

>Linear A and B have many similarities and maybe you are right Linear A is written in code ,but I have more chances to be Greek than any other known language.
---First of all, I absolutely do NOT think linear A was written in in code. As to the similarities, they would be because the Achaeans adapted the script of Linear A to use for the new language.
- More ore less same writing, yes, but different language.
If you wish to discuss this further, I advice you to visit the discussion forum on the Aegaeanet pages, and get answers from specialists like John Younger and Bjarte Kaldhoel. These are closer to decifering Linear A than any of us.
>the occupation of a stronghold is not an invasion (I think )
---It is not necessarily a large scale invasion to do so, but if you focus on intensions, it is not correct to say that there was no hostile Egyptian military presence in the Aegean.
>The Pelasgians are a great mystery ,I believe that both we agree that the Pelasgians were the inhabitants of present Greece,I claim that they are related to Greeks you don't.
---What do You base this claim on?
>I am talking about 400.000 years ……(I don't say that Greeks were present that time but they kept memories )
---Memories from 400.000 years ago? Do you mean to say that Greeks can trace a direct lineage from the Homo Heidelbergensis? Those creatures would scare the daylight even out of our cousins, the much later Homo Sapiens Neandertalensis.
Or did they keep memories from other animals? Why did you not say - for example - 16 000 BC, when the sea-level may have been lower than today? Why did you pick a date 300.000 years before the birth of 'the mythocondial Eve'? Are you sure you did not mean 40.000 years ago, as there are no evidence of anatomically modern humans in Europe prior to this?
>Trond you agree with many of my claims but I haven't read your claim ,it is not enough to disagree ,I want your opinion.
---My opinion is that Greeks are the result of a mix between more than one nation, that most of the language is Indo-European, and that the term Greek is confusing to use if you speak of the time before 1000 BC. All evidence indicates that there was a population in the Aegean prior to the introduction of a proto-greek language. The result of this is what we now call Greek.
Call them Minoans, Aegeans, Pelasgians, Barbaroi, Bebryces, Palasat, Messenians, Euboeans, Chalchidic, Cycladic or what you will, but please do not just call them Greek.
To simplify this, it is better to choose a constructed word like Evans did: Minoans.
Or, alternatively, you may choose not to simplify it.
I hereby repeat my previous statement that the Greek nation has plenty to pride herself in. Also the heritage built on the shoulders of other nations. Who is more 'Minoan' TODAY than the Greeks?
Concerning Atlantis and its relation to 'Minoans', I would not resist theories of close contact between them.
Canaanites were in close contact with Cypriot 'Minoans', and also in the Aegean.
What is interesting here:
- Who was an exponent of a maritime trading culture in this region prior to 1200 BC?
I would say: Not greeks. Minoans certainly. Canaanites propably. I would personally hesitate to reckon Atlanteans as either of these.
This thread: Was Atlantis a Phoenician city?
Carthage is reckoned as Punic city, and its harbour appears to be based on the same concept as Plato's description.
Moreover, the name Carthage could derive from Qart Hadasht, meaning in canaanite something like 'New City', or in Greek: 'Nea Polis'.
Erick, do you think the 'old city' is the city in question?
And Perseus: What do you make of the name Charchedon? Why would the greeks call it by this name?
With friendly regards,
Trond"""

Can you tell me Trond why the invading Hellenes as you say adapted all the autochtone divinities ?They had theirs (as you or Erick say) why adopt the divinities of an enslaved and inferior opponent?
Are you certain that they didn't use the same language ?How you can prove it? I claim that the tablets of Linear B in Crete and mainland Greece were in Greek language that means that the Minoans and the Mycenaean spoke Greek .
The Messeneans were eilotes not exactly slaves, many times they were fighting with the Spartans.Why you call foreign oppressors the Spartans?
The Athenians and the Megarites were always enemies so what?
I know that some dialects of Albanian are spoken in mainland (not in islands,if you have any proves for that) my mother in law speaks Arvanitika ,but if you call an Arvaniti Albanian he will cut your throat……
I never said that present Greeks are 100% children of the Ancients but I am sure that they are more Greeks than the Italians are Romans the France are Galles ,the Israelis are Hebrew and etc…

You don't know if Linear A is different language ,we have TWO FACTS,
a.The signs of Linear B(Greek language) and Linear A have many similarities.
b.Linear A has not yet been deciphered ,so every language has the same possibilities ,you can’t exclude Greek because you don't like them.
Many Greek writers think that the Pelasgians were inhabitants of Greece and later transformed to Hellenes or Greeks,Strabo,Hesiod,Herodotus ,Skymnos,even Thucydides .

The Greeks use names of places with incidents that happened even 400.000 years before ,how you can explain the names Mesogeios or Tempi or Farsala or Mitilinini or Vosporos they describe geological events from that era .

The point is not what I call them in Iliad they called theirselves Danaous or Achaeans …..

Yes but the problem is that Linear B is Greek language and if the majority of signs of ieroglyph Linear A and Linear B are same ….
quote:

Because Mr Mallory can't find an explanation for Greek names like Odysseus or Corinth or Larissa,that means that the Greeks were IndoEuropeans?

If you consider Mr. Mallory's evidence of the existence of "obvious" Indo-European names for the most prominent heroes of Greek epic - such as Odysseus & Theseus - and for many of the Greek divinities - such as Athene, Hera, Aphrodite & Hermes - as well as for words that expressed certain political or social concepts that were basic to Greek society, and for place names - such as Corinth, Knossos, Salamis, Larisa, Samos, Olympus & Mycenae - to be a "joke," then no amount of logic and/or reason will ever suggest to you an Indo-European origin for the Mycenaeans/Greeks. For the rest of the world, however, the two types of linguistic evidence presented by J. P. Mallory in his book are very "suggestive" that something is "amiss" in your claim of Greek "autochthony". It is, of course, not the only evidence that Mr. Mallory presented in his book for an Indo-European origin of the Greeks. He does cite the introduction of a small body of warlike intruders that introduced the horse & chariot, new weaponry such as the sword and body shield, and status burials under tumulus (such as at Marathon) during the Middle Helladic period.
He also cites the discontinuity that occurs between Early Helladic II & Early Helladic III sites, which observe destruction levels, evidence of abandonment, changes in architecture (*especially with reference to the appearance of houses with an apsidal end), the appearance of burials within settlements, the appearance of perforated stone "battle-axes," clay "anchors," and Minyan ware. Quite a few of the aforementioned articles of evidence, such as the "apsidal end" houses and the stone "battle-axes", suggest a possible origin of the Balkans region (by way of Anatolia) for the newcomers (possibly members of, or descendants of, the Ezero and/or Baden cultures). In addition to this, there is a substantial amount of archaeological evidence (which I do not currently have the time to get into) discussed by Mr. Mallory. Taken altogether, I would have to say that the evidence is very strongly in favor of the intrusion into Greece by an Indo-European element who then subjugated and absorbed the autochthonous inhabitants.
quote:

Tell me why I have to believe Mr Mallory and his nonsense( for me) and not a dozen of Ancient writers who claim that Greeks were autochthones.

Nobody said that you have to believe Mr. Mallory, however, for you to have classified his work as "nonsense" is fairly pretentious of you, having not read the book, and especially considering the humble & modest attitude that Mr. Mallory assumes in his writing.
Would you please inform us as to which dozen or so ancient authors claimed that the Greeks were the autochthonous inhabitants of Greece?

Dionisios Alikarnasefs
Thoucydides
Isocrates
Skymnos
Pausanias
Pindaros
Strabo
Are these enough?

quote:

This is the best joke after Phoenicians.

Your disdain for the Phoenicians is as evident as your ignorance regarding their culture and history. Why are you so disdainful towards them, when your ancestors regarded them quite highly?

I will get my book for the Phoenicians and then we will talk for their culture and history.
quote:

"The sheer clumsiness in expressing the Greek language by either the Linear A or Linear B syllabaries lends support that they were not originally invented by Greek speakers. It is also clear from this that we cannot follow the trail of Greek origins on Crete but must look to southern Greece and the origins of the Mycenaeans."
Speculations nothing else.

Actually, Mr. Mallory merely stated that the clumsiness associated with expressing the Greek language using the Linear A & Linear B syllabaries lends support to the argument that the languages were not originally invented by Greek speakers. It is a valid, reasonable, and logical conclusion, when taken together with all of the other evidence, and therefore not speculative.

Great clumsiness ,after 3800 years with a small effort I can understand Linear B…….
I would e VALID and LOGICAL CONCLUSION if Mr Mallory presented us the language of Linear B, but he can't so this argument is speculative
quote:

For the Pelasgians Herodotus says that "I CANNOT SAY EXACTLY" that means he wasn't sure what language Pelasgians spoke and he says they spoke barbaric not Non Greek ,there is a great difference between barbaric and non Greek ….

Herodotus' inability to positively identify the language that the Pelasgians spoke as being "this" or "that" language is irrelevant; Herodotus quite clearly stated that - judging from the Pelasgians who survived to his day - they spoke a language that was not Greek.
Your assertion that "there is a great difference between saying barbaric and non-Greek" is just plain false. To quote from Liddell & Scott's Complete Greek-English Lexicon:
quote:

barbaros, on, barbarous, i.e. non-Greek, foreign, not in Hom. (but cf. barbarophounos); b. psychai Heraclit. 107; esp. as Subst. barbaroi, originally all non-Greek speaking peoples, then specially of the Medes and Persians, A. Pers 255, Hdt. 1.58, etc.

The word "barbarous" was used to indicate a foreigner, someone who was not of Greece, and who did not speak the language (or did not speak it well). To accuse somebody of speaking Greek "barbarostomia" was to say that they spoke Greek badly (i.e. as a foreigner would speak it).

You said it …did not it speak it well.
And again I say Herodotous IS NOT SURE ,we(Greeks can blame him for lot of things ,but when he is not sure for something he says so ,I AM NOT SURE ,I HEARD etc)
quote:

...what do you mean Greek Macedonian ,I never read Greek -Athenian or Greek- Spartan?

What I meant was that Greece was ruled by the Macedonian Empire at the time of Alexander the Great; he had inherited it from his father Philip of Macedonia. An inhabitant of Greece at that time would therefore have been considered to be a Greco-Macedonian.

But I don't think you ever used the term Greco-Athenian during Persian Wars or Greco -Spartan or Greco-Theban,why you use Greco -Macedonian.If you want my opinion because you want to separate Greeks from Macedonians…
quote:

the Ptolemys are Greek Pharaos of Aegypt and Greece became Roman province on 146 bc Ptolenys were much older in Aegypt.

You are correct that the Ptolemaic Dynasty pharaohs of Egypt were the Greco-Macedonian descendants of Alexander the Great, and that they inherited Egypt from him (ca. 300 BC), and also that Cleopatra was a member of that lineage (through her father Philip XII). It should also be noted, however, that the Ptolemaic Dynasty pharaohs were completely Egyptianized. Also, to correct you on one point - the Romans conquered Greece in 168 BC, at the close of the Third Macedonian War (172-168 BC).
quote:

I read...Rizzoli's book and I found it very poor...

I am dumbfounded by this statement, as the book is a conglomerate of writings taken from the foremost scholars in Phoenician research, study, archaeology, etc. It is 670 pages of interesting information regarding Phoenician history, archaeology, culture, etc., and any individual that has read the book cannot help but to come away from it having gained a better understanding as to "who" & "what" the Phoenicians were. Personally, I don't believe that you have actually read the book - I think that you are only saying it was "poor" in an attempt to discredit the information that I have quoted from it - because if you had read the book you never would have made the statement you made next (in your previous posting).
quote:

You will agree that the name is Greek and we don't know how they call themselves -is this true?-the Canaanites is a speculation.

To quote from Rizzoli's Phoenicians "As early as the 3rd millenium B.C., the term 'Canaanites' was used for the people and 'Canaan' for the region, but this denotes the whole Syro-Palestinian area. The term is also used specifically for the Phoenicians, especially in the Old Testament, and it lived on in theMediterranean diaspora, and later, too: Saint Augustine, talking about the population of Africa in his time, says that the peasants called themselves the Kena'ani."
It also tells us that the terms "Phoinikes" for the people and "Phoinike" for the region were terms used by others, with references having been found as far back as Homeric times. "There is an obvious link between these terms and the common noun phoinix, which means 'purple-red' and referred to the typical Phoenician industry of dyeing fabrics purple. But it could be that the name, in its common usage at any rate, was used earlier, in the 2nd millenium B.C.: in Mycenaean texts, one finds the feminine adjective po-ni-ki-ja, meaning 'red' and referring to a chariot." Therefore, it can quite confidently be said that "Canaanites" is NOT speculation.
quote:

I tired to listen this pro Phoenician propaganda,and I ask you is Phoenician propaganda better than my Greek propaganda?

If you are tired of hearing about Phoenicians, then don't visit a thread that discusses the potentiality of Atlantis as a Phoenician city. There is not, however, any Phoenician "propaganda" being pushed in this thread. The Phoenician connection is merely the conclusion that I have drawn based upon (coming up on) six years of research and a literal translation of the text.
In the future I'll try and limit the use of Greek words in my English phrases, in order to avoid inciting further outbursts.
Warm Regards,
Erick
------------------
Not to visit the thread? Pure nonsense no further comments.
Limit the use of Greek words ,you can't my friend……(phrases)

I used a search engine to look up Sergio Frau. http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/search?invocationType=topsearchbox.%2Faol%2Fjsp%2Fsearch.jsp&query=Sergio+Frau+Sardinia&x=24&y=7

His book is probably not translated into English. That is a handicap for most of the people who read this topic. I myself do NOT read Italian.

Erick, who is the moderator for this topic, wants to publish a paper about the main city of Atlantis.

Does Sergio Frau's book discuss the era of the Sea Peoples (ca 1300-1175 BC)?

thanks for welcoming me,

Sorry for english translation of the book, I think only few reviews appeared around (I saw one in french).

I will do my best (starting from my next topic) to resume the book and to state the sources that Frau exploits to back his theory.

The theory has a special and deep approach to Sea Peoples and to the mediterranean proto-histry.

Frau thinks that sea peoples invasions were originated from west-med-sea (may be together with some Aegean/Asean "cousins").

He recognizes Shardana from Sardinia, Shekelesh from Sicily, Tursha from Italy and so on.

I will write more tomorrow.

Just to say, Frau (and other language scientists) thinks that "Atlas" "Atlan" come from Sumer "ATTALU" that means "West" "Falling" (against "Asia" from "Asu" "Rising). We may think that this root is kept in the word "Italy".

According to frau the mitological Atlantis (connected with biblical tartis) was composed by a colition of pirates-smiths-sailors-traders that got spread around the med 1200 BC around.
That was the end of bronze age (end of tin trade?) and the beginning of iron (an expedient against bronze lack?) connected wit some major trouble in the west-med-sea and the spread of smiths around the coasts.

After mitological atlantis that coalition become the phoenician maritime empire (and may the the etrurian people).

The same coalition of western and eastern peoples was that against Rome supporting Hannibal and the Carthagean side (somewhat like an Atlantean legacy).
It is not clear if Carthage was the new foundation of Tyr/Sidon or may be the contrary or may be Phoenician/Carthagean ports were the evolution of an older "PELASGIAN" western-med civilization connected to the "TOWER BUILDERS" and "MEGALITHIC" peoples of Tyrrenian seas and neighbours.

Of course the theory standing point is the moving of Hercules pillars from Gibraltair to Sicily strait. The greek knowledge of seas increased with time: the first "OKEANOS" (same root for "AQUA") was the AEGEAN sea. After that the eastern med and finally the western side. Only after some time the limits were put at Gibraltair.

Some additional hints: the phoenician alphabet (without vowels) was written from right to left and some words can be read in the mirror:
MILQART=[M]LQRT=(T)RQLS=HERACLES
since the M sign is similar to SIGMA
ANAT='NT=TN'=ATENA
ASTARTE='STRT=TRTS'=TARTESSOS

Last note: Atlantis in the Bible can be more or less identified with Tarsis and the other topographic sites: GENESIS 10:4 ...Elisa, Tarsis, Kittim, Iavan, Dodanim (Rodanim)
(In sardinia the "Nora Stone" reports the phoenician writing "b-TRSHSH"="In Tarsis"="In tartessos")

May be enoug for today.

Please feel free to tell me if you are interested or not. May be you have specific question about the theory.

Bye and sorry if all this stuff is annoying.

>Are you certain that they didn't use the same language ?How you can prove it? I claim that the tablets of Linear B in Crete and mainland Greece were in Greek language that means that the Minoans and the Mycenaean spoke Greek .
---If linear A and linear B is virtually the same script, and B is legible as Greek, A is not, then wouldn't be logical to say that A is non-greek, and B is Greek?
About your claim ...that means that the Minoans and the Mycenaean spoke Greek.)
-Minoans? Why?
If this is your conclusion, (A rethorical question):-why does it not mean that the Phoenicians spoke Greek? Or the Ottomans? Or the Germans? They were all present both in the mainland and Crete during the last 400.000 years.

>The Messeneans were eilotes not exactly slaves, many times they were fighting with the Spartans.Why you call foreign oppressors the Spartans?
---Because that is how the Messenians saw them. The were descendants of tribes moving in from the north. What I mean, they were greeks, and greeks = foreigners

>I know that some dialects of Albanian are spoken in mainland (not in islands,if you have any proves for that) my mother in law speaks Arvanitika ,but if you call an Arvaniti Albanian he will cut your throat……
---You said dialect of A........, so watch your throat around mother-in-law...

>I never said that present Greeks are 100% children of the Ancients but I am sure that they are more Greeks than the Italians are Romans the France are Galles ,the Israelis are Hebrew and etc…
---I agree with you, Perseus.

>You don't know if Linear A is different language ,we have TWO FACTS,
a.The signs of Linear B(Greek language) and Linear A have many similarities.
b.Linear A has not yet been deciphered ,so every language has the same possibilities ,you can’t exclude Greek because you don't like them.
---Keep one thing clear: I like Greeks. But Greek is the language that we must view as posessing least 'possibilities' concerning linear A. If you are impossible to convince otherwise you may continue working out of the presumption Linear A and linear B are the same, Minoans and Mycenaeans are the same, a.s.o., but as I said first: - Don't bet your money on it. A language relative of Tamazight or even Kartveli would get better odds in my book.

>Many Greek writers think that the Pelasgians were inhabitants of Greece and later transformed to Hellenes or Greeks,Strabo,Hesiod,Herodotus ,Skymnos,evenThucydides .
---Transformed to Hellenes? Can you have misunderstood them? Are they quite clear about this? I know other thing they claimed... But ok, I settle for transformation. The point is: After their transformation they were Hellenes, but prior to their transformation they were NOT hellenes.

>The Greeks use names of places with incidents that happened even 400.000 years before ,how you can explain the names Mesogeios or Tempi or Farsala or Mitilinini or Vosporos they describe geological events from that era .
---According to Greeks, Neither Kronos nor Uranos nor any mortal existed 400.000 years ago. Do you think Homo Erectus was greek? This is something you should never say around scholars unless you want to amuse them with absurdities. Maybe it is better you discuss this with Akata. I specialize in what has happened after the last Glacial Stage.

I think I will not comment any more on these claims. It is getting repetitive, and nothing seems to influence you except your own conviction. No offence intended.

I like Ancient Greeks more than most other ancient folk, but I don't care too much for nationalism, espescially not when used in the context of history/research.
----------------

Welcome to Karibu,
- Very interesting to learn of this book by Sergio Frau. I would personally support most of the suggestions you mentioned here.
It would be valued to read your comments as a representative of his readers, so that we who do not master Italian get a little insight into this book.

1) http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~rtykot/PR30%20-%20ACS%202002%20obsidian.pdf
This paper by the foremost obsidian specialist states that Sardinia was settled during the Cardial culture 6000-3000 BC. Sardinian FLINT was exported to Corsica during 6000-5700 BC. Then obsidian was discovered on Sardinia. Subsequently, during 5700-3000 BC, Sardinia became the leading SOURCE of obsidian for Liguria and Southern France.

2) http://www.usd.edu/erp/Sardinia/prehist.htm
This article demonstrates that after the obsidian lost value, Sardinia became a distributor of Bell Beaker (=copper age Europe, 3000-2000 BC) items throughout the western Mediterranean, as far east as Sicily. During 2000-1500 (=Crete's Middle Minoan, or bronze age) Sardinia had no international connections. But then during 1500-1200 BC (= the period of Mycenae culture in Greece), Sardinia again became very prosperous, by linking Sardinia to the copper sources on Cyprus.

Author: gene douglas (---.nas15.los-angeles2.ca.us.da.qwest.ne)
Date: 31-Jan-04 15:26

Hello, Everybody:

I decided to skip over here from the "Inner Space" message board to give you some information about the spread of mankind, which to me is very nearly earth-shaking. However, in order to do this, I'll have to tell you something about a 144,000 word book that took me more than twenty years to complete, to which I gave the overly long title, "Jesus and Moses Are Buried in India, Birthplace of Abraham and the Hebrews!" Although a few visitors to this website know I have written some books, I have briefly referred to them only in context. Besides the aforementioned book, the others deal with the India origin of our Amerindians and the impact that the ancient disease of mental conditioning (belief) has on the human mind.

This is the reason why I did not - and do not - promote them much: During my lifetime studies of these matters, I discovered that the biblical account of the "Flaming Sword," which turns every way, to discourage mankind from acquiring knowledge, was two hundred percent true. Contrary to popular belief, the Serpent, known in India as Naga Raja (King of the Snakes) and Cain were the good guys! Truth is hazy at best. My knowledge of the things about which I have been writing arises from my struggles to slip past the "Flaming Sword" and overcome the grip of religious preconditioning on my mind. I knew that if I spent all my energies promoting a certain book as if it were total gospel, even selling millions of copies and getting fanatical disciples, sooner or later I would find knowledge that escaped me. I would then have to tell my readers, "I guess I've changed my mind," and present another aspect and upper level of what went before, leading my readers on similar but different paths. Even the Buddha told his disciples before he died, "In all these years, I have not taught you the truth." Like nearly everybody else, I'd love to become a millionaire, but not in this way.

Regardless of this book's controversial aspect, several publishers offered to take it, provided that I'd let them edit (Flaming Sword) my work, but I refused. I wanted the book to be published "as was," warts, smelly armpits, "unscientific, personal remarks," and all! It's because of the "Flaming Sword" that mankind knows so little of himself, his long dead and forgotten civilizations, and his divinity.

Readers of the "Jesus and Moses" book either like the book or hate it. When I first started writing this book, I initially did not know I'd find enough information for a book. I was just satisfying an inner urge to clear up - for my own self only - a few mysteries. But later on, I discovered that I was unconsciously writing a book.

A principal complaint is that I did not write it well enough. I personally feel that the writing is more than acceptable, but it is not so well organized as I'd like. This is because since new information kept - and keeps - pouring in constantly, I'd have to rewrite it. I rewrote that monster well over six times until I decided that I'd have to rewrite it thousands of times if I didn't adopt a new strategy. Therefore, I would just fit in the in-flowing information wherever possible.

Years after I unconsciously started this book, I became acutely aware that a certain group, a Hindu ruling class, had settled the entire world: a North Indian warrior and trading class, the Yadavas or Yahudevas, with the caste name of Khassi, Hatti, Khatti, Kad, Kadu, Ketu, etc., etc. In one part of the third chapter of my book, entitled "Ancient History of the Indo-Hebrews," I discussed this anomaly under the heading of, "The Cushites and Kassites Are the Parent Stock of All the Nations From Spain to the Southern Tip of India, of China, and All Parts of the Far East, of Africa, and Even of the American Indians." I should've also included the Hittites and Canaanites, as well as nations like Great Britain - and every other corner of the earth.

In 2000 A.D., I mistakenly thought I had discovered all I could about this subject. I then paid iUniverse to publish it. But no sooner had the book came out, the information came rolling in again. You see, I went to great lengths to get this information, researching in prestigious libraries all over this country, ordering more than ten thousand dollars of books from India and the like. This was the time when I discovered that these Yadavas, Khassi, Hatti, Khatti, Cushites, Kassites, Hittites, etc., ad infinitum, were just the PHOENICIANS! Furthermore, I discovered that not one of the so-called "Phoenician nations" regarded themselves as related to one another in any way. Each felt themselves to be as different as we Americans believe ourselves to be different from the Japanese, Spaniards, Russians, Chinese, Brazilians, etc. Do people who sail ships all have to be of the same culture? I think not. In those days, anyone who was a seafaring trading nation was a Phoenician. Like all my preachments about these matters, they are not original with me. I won't even dare utter any of my opinions about anything unless I first get some degree of prior corroboration, such as that of the world's leading expert on the Phoenicians, the distinguished 19th century British orientalist and historian, George Rawlinson, author of "Phoenicia." The Bible confirms this as well: The descendants of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. The descendants of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. The descendants of Javan: Elishah and Tarshish, the Kittim, and the Dodanim. FROM THESE THE MARITIME NATIONS BRANCHED OUT. (These are the descendants of Japeth) by their lands - each with its language - their clans and their nations." (Genesis 10: 2-5; Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures, published by the Jewish Publication Society).

Most of us know that Javan settled the Grecian isles. Javan derives from the Sanskrit Yavan or Yavana, a term that may derive from the Sanskrit Yauvana, meaning "Youth; Young Person." But what about Japheth, a son of Noah? In the Hindu scriptures he is referred to as Jyapeti or Yapeti. He is also Jupiter and Zeus.

The following account, taken from the Hindu Matsya Purana (Fish Chronicle), describes some of the people who, after a severe flood, left India for other parts of the world:

(quote)
To Satyavarman, that sovereign of the whole earth, were born three sons: the eldest Shem; then Sham; and thirdly, Jyapeti by name.

They were all men of good morals, excellent in virtue and virtuous deeds, skilled in the use of weapons to strike with, or to be thrown; brave men, eager for victory in battle.

But Satyavarman, being continually delighted with devout meditation, and seeing his sons fit for dominion, laid upon them the burdens of government.

Whilst he remained honouring and satisfying the gods, and priests, and kine, one day, by the act of destiny, the king, having drunk mead

Became senseless and lay asleep naked. Then, was he seen by Sham, and by him were his two brothers called:

To whom he said, ‘What now has befallen? In what state is this our sire?’ By these two he was hidden with clothes, and called to his senses again and again.

Having recovered his intellect, and perfectly knowing what had passed, he cursed Sham, saying, ‘Thou shalt be the servant of servants.’
And since thou wast a laugher in their presence, from laughter thou shalt acquire a name. Then he gave Sham the wide domain on the south of the snowy mountains.

And to Jyapeti he gave all on the north of the snowy mountains; but he, by the power of religious contemplation, attained supreme bliss.
(Unquote)

If you have read the Jewish or Christian bible, can you guess who Satyavarman, Shem, Sham, and Jyapeti were? Were Satyavarman and his sons our Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japhet? The Old Testament tells us that Satyavarman (Noah) got drunk by imbibing wine made from his own vines in what is now Armenia, near Mt. Ararat. But I’m absolutely sure that my Hindu readers would know from where this story originated.

In Sanskrit, Satya-Varman means "Protector of Truth; Protector of the Righteous." Varman often occurs at the end of the names of Kshatriyas (Hereditary Hindu Leadership Caste). Shem/Sem means "An Assembly." According to White racists, (S)Ham was turned black as punishment for lacking in respect for his father. The Christian Fundamentalists insist that Sham fathered the Africans. It was this superstition that helped perpetuate the institution of slavery in our antebellum (pre-Civil War) South. Jyapeti became the "God of the Sun" or the Christian, Jewish, Assyrian, Greek and Roman Jupiter and Jahve or Jehovah. For the Hindus, he is Dyaus Pitar, mankind’s first known manifestation of God Shiva.

Even the Vikings were Phoenicians. How do I know this? First of all, we know that the Vikings were traders and sailors. Second, they were composed of different Scandanavian trading nations who felt no particular loyalty to one another. Third, the word "Scandanavia" itself is surely derived from an ancient Hindu name of mariners, traders, and warriors, called SKANDANAVA. Skanda WAS and IS an extremely popular god of all parts of India, especially among Hindu mariners and Hindus who live in the diaspora. To confirm this, read the online article, "Cult of the Child-God Crosses a Millennial Milestone" by Partick Harrigan(http://murugan.org/research/child-god.htm). He says, "Today we are witness to the fact that the god has…crossed the dark waters to become at home in nations like Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, Fiji, Mauritius, Reunion Island and South Africa, not to mention the western nations of Europe, Australia and North America."

In Sanskrit, NAVA means ship. Thus, the ancient SKANDA-NAVAS (Scandanavians) were mariner-traders who sailed all over the world, settling in new lands, even becoming the Nahuas (Navas) of Mexico. Another name of SKANDA was KARTIKEYA, also known Kart or Kartuk. We find Skanda under this name in the ancient Phoenician-African nation of Cartaginia, as Melkart, a name derived from "Melik" (King) Kart (Kartikeya).

I urge anyone reading this posting not to become disturbed by information defying his preconditioning or "Flaming Swords." Even the Bible says the truth will make us free. I can honestly say this: Had I not spent my life researching these matters and tearing away the "Flaming Swords" keeping me imprisoned within my ego, I would probably have entered my old age as an embittered, evil-tempered, mentally disturbed atheist. Because of this, I KNOW that the world's truths ARE contained in the holy books of the world, and that all of us have a divine destiny!

Can you answer me how in the hell the inhabitants of Greece knew that Vosporos was a narrow piece of land 14000 years ago? On central Greece there is a town Farsala this name is ancient and means "On the beach" and yes many thousand years ago this was a seaside town ,can you imagine how they knew ?

You don't present not a single argument you just say that they are not Greeks or they don't speak Greek etc…
If you claim that the former inhabitants of Greece were not Hellenes you must prove it otherwise I have the same right with you to claim that they are Greeks.

Minoan is Minoan. Linear B is linear B. This is a fact.

If there were found English writings in America, does that prove that both Native Americans and European Americans were English? Or that they were 'Americans'?

About the Indo-European theory:
I agree if you think that there are some things amiss about this theory. I agree that there are nationalistic undertones in the word 'indo-germanic'.
It is not my theory, I merely relate to it, and use it for communication. I believe it is useful terminology, as long as we are aware of its shortcomings.
Perseus, do you reckon Greek language NOT to be classified as an I-E language?
How would you choose to group it? As an isolate? Afro-Asiatic?
What term from a regular encyclopedia/lexicon would you use when determining what language family Greek belongs to?

What happened to the 400.000 years of memories? 14.000 years this time? If you claim there may be remnants of memories about a rise in sea-level around from 12.000 BC, I have no objections.
But argumenting with an inland toponym resembling 'on the bank/shore' or something of that sort? I would prefer if you mentioned some site below the present-day sea-level with a name that sounds like: 'Not by the shore'.

Need we prove that people migrate? When do YOU think that the Greek suprastatum language first arrived to Crete?

Let us settle for this agreement: Many wordstems found in Linear A are still extant as part of the substrata in Greek language.
But let us not draw too far-fetched conclusions from this. It should be enough to say that Greek contains a minor part of the language used in the Linear A tablets.

Again I refer to the specialists discussing this in the Aegeanet forum.

England, Germany and USA have been - or are still - known to come off as imperialists. I would say that imperialism is not the word for national sentiments in nations as Lithuania, Ireland and Greece. Not very imperialistic. Rather nationalistic.

My opinions concerning the relationship btw 'Minoans' and Greeks or Pelasgians and Greeks should not offend a Greek nationalist. I would say that the Greeks are heirs to this heritage.
Take pride in it!

Is there any way, perhaps, that you nice fellows could start a new thread on "Greek Origins" to continue your debate. It would be nice to see posts on the Phoenicians here.

Thanks

I ask you good people: When would you consider it earliest possible time to speak of Phoenicians?
- Then what would be the latest possible time for their characteristics to have appeared?
How about origins of Phoenicians?
Of Canaanites? Of Punic peoples?

Relation to Creti & Pleti? (Cheretim & Pherezim). How about Kittim?

Any opinions out of the ordinary?

Posts concerning this would be valued and read with great interest.

Respectfully,

For me the IE theory is based in totally false clues ,you can't compare languages from different timelines ,to compare Greek ,Latin and Sanskrit is a big mistake .I don't have the knowledge to classify GL but I think it is an isolate language .

Nothing happened to 400.000 years of memories ,this the date(aprox) that the "Mediterranean Sea " became a Sea .And I ask you again how could someone name a Sea "Middle Earth" it is not logical but we gave that name, why? ….i don't have an answer ,do you? Maybe it is coincidence but then Vosporos ,or Farsala ,or Tempi ,all these names are geological events .
Trond it is very easy to find to map of Greece and see where Farsala is ,and the name is not "resembling "'on the bank/shore'" it means 'on the bank/shore' and it was on the bank/shore . http://www.1hellas.com/larissa/

Larissa is an ancient name too ,so ancient that the IE's claim that it is not Greek and belongs to first inhabitants of the area ,there is an explanation but I have to find it .
And I am not offended….

ATALANTE,

Sergio Frau says only a small note about obsidian but it is very important; he thinks tha obsidian could be recognized ad the famous Orichalcum since this material during all the bronze age was used for some tools.
Bronze and copper was so preciuos that was used for main tool (like axes) while obsidian was used for small tools (arrows points).
I had the chance to be in Lipari and gave a look to the important local neolithic Museum. It is astounding that from that little isle obsidian was traded in all the western Med.

I think that orichalcum was instead the special arsenicum-copper league that sometimes lucky miners found on some mountains (mountain bronze). That special league was ready-made for weapons because getting rusty slower than other metals.

Again for Perseus,

I think that the topic title question is the key of atlantis investigation because; the answer is "yes" if you can individuate that Sea Peoples (Islands Peoples) are the fore-runners of Phoenicians. Actually Frau thinks that before 1500 bc and after 1175 bc there were big remixing among peoples in the Med sea. May be the western colonization started from asia when culture was somehow unified and then after the troubles of 1200 bc another remixing spread the sea peoples back on the eastern coasts of ancient world.
Kadmo in Thebe, Peleset in Canaan, Tyrrenians in Tuscany and so on.
So may be we can say that Atlantis was Phoenician and also a bit Greek because at that time there was not that difference we can find at 500 bc after half a millenium (may be more) of geopolitical separation between greek influence and Carthagean one.

For Wright,

I forgot to mention that in the Nora Stone you can find, together with the "b trshs" writing, also the "shrdn" word: the first appearence of Sardinia/Shardana naming.

For everybody,

a beatiful suggestion about the connection atlantis/Phoenicians/Ancient Tyre come from the Zeus-Europa Myth; you know, they say that Zeus, transformed in bull, took Europa from Tyre or Sidonis (in Phoenicia) and brought her in Lycia passing through Crete.
The strange thing is that the route is going to west and then to east; another strangeness is that some myth versions say that the bull would pass near Boreas (in Lybia). Frau thinks that Europa (Erebu in Phoenician means "Evening", "alling Sun") come from the "western med Tyre" abducted by Zeus to te eastern side.
e
I just want to end referencing to the BIble Ezekiel 25, 26 and 27 about Tyre, Islands and so on. Fray thinks that in the Bible you can recognize some hidden and transformed themes about proto-historical mediterranean.

Bye

The single most important advancement which Phoenicians added to civilization was the PHONETIC alphabet. This was adopted ca.1900 BC (perhaps in Egypt's 12th Dynasty reign of Amenemhet III).

The earliest examples of written Semitic languages are what scholars call the "proto-sinaitic" inscriptions (both in Sinai and directly across the Red Sea in southern Egypt.

Here is a comparison of the letters in 4 closely related languages: "proto-sinaitic", Phoenician, Ugarit, and Hebrew. http://ancientroad.home.att.net/PSUGPHChart.html

And this excellent news report explains that south Egypt is where the earliest examples (1900 BC) of the "proto-sinaitic" script were found. http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/science/111499sci-alphabet-origin.html

The Bible theme of writing the original 10 Commandments (at Sinai) seems to commemorate the "place" where phonetic writing began. http://www.bibleorigins.net/ShatteredProtoSinaitictablet.html

But the Phoenicians (on the shores of the Mediterranean Sea) were the first CITIES which adopted phonetic writing.

Scientific tests (which were perfected around 1995) show that there were 3 separate "routes" for distributing obsidian to the western Mediterranean. Lipari supplied obsidian to the Italian peninsula. Sardinia supplied obsidian to Tuscany (north Italy), Liguria, and Southern France. But Pantelleria supplied obsidian to North Africa, Sicily, and Malta. http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~rtykot/Vergilian%20Society%20abstract.html

This division of trade routes for obsidian might originate 3 of the separate "kingdoms" within the empire of Atlantis.

For your information King Minos every 9 years was going on a mountain and then he was bringing the laws written in stones …….

Karibu ,
Why strange it is Alpha -Thita -Hta -Ni -Alpha.Unfortunatelly I can 't find something ,if I am not wrong ,we have the name of Athena in a Linear B tablet,and an Archaelogist P.Forre says that he discovered a sign from 2,700 Bc with the name of Athena (I don't have any details)
We have at least two Heracles ,the first one who is very ancient and the second who inmmitated his labors…
The first Heracles started the Olympic Games.

The similarities in religion, culture and architecture between Plato's Atlantis and early Phoenician colonies in the west are very interesting.

-----------------------------------
Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

Each of the ten kings in his own division and in his own city had the
absolute control of the citizens, and, in most cases, of the laws,
punishing and slaying whomsoever he would. Now the order of precedence
among them and their mutual relations were regulated by the commands of
Poseidon which the law had handed down. These were inscribed by the first
kings on a pillar of orichalcum, which was situated in the middle of the
island, at the temple of Poseidon, whither the kings were gathered together
every fifth and every sixth year alternately, thus giving equal honour to the
odd and to the even number.

Now on the pillar, besides the laws, there was inscribed an oath invoking mighty curses on the disobedient.

There were many special laws affecting the several kings inscribed about the
temples, but the most important was the following: They were not to take up
arms against one another, and they were all to come to the rescue if any one
in any of their cities attempted to overthrow the royal house; like their ancestors,
they were to deliberate in common about war and other matters, giving the supremacy
to the descendants of Atlas.
-----------------------------------

The mutual relations between the kings of Atlantis were regulated
by the commands of Poseidon. These were inscribed by the first kings
on a pillar of orichalcum, situated in the middle of the island, at the
capital city. This fact, and the quote above, is very interesting when you read the following:

-----------------------------------
Quote from Phoenicians and the West- by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

In ancient trade, the temple built close to a market or place of exchange guaranteed the protection of visitors
and merchants, and the religious institution acted at times
as an efficient financial intermediary or bank. The sanctuaries in antiquity were the prime places of commercial transactions in a foreign country. The first condition of any market or trading colony set up
on a frontier or in a distant land was to ensure that its
visitors were not molested or robbed. And, as a general
rule, that security was offered by a god, under whose auspices
and protection deals were verified. The name of the god was
invoked in oaths sanctioning contracts.
Indeed, we know that the monarchs of developed countries
negotiated covenants or commercial treaties, as did Hiram
and Solomon. But between unequal or colonial societies,
the only security offered lay in the recognized sovereignty
of a god in his temple or sacred precinct. A supernatural
or divine presence automatically converted any act of fraud
or violence into sacrilege and destroyed the mutual confidence
between the two parties, by virtue of the norms of hospitality and
asylum.
-----------------------------------

The presence of the god in his temple automatically converted any act of fraud
or violence into sacrilege and destroyed the mutual confidence between the parties.

According to Herodotus(ca 450 B.C ), the Persian monarch ordered the Tyrians ( Phoenicians from the city of Tyre ) to

participate in a planned naval attack upon their sister city, a command which they refused to obey because of the strong oaths that bound them to their colonial descendants. It reminds you of Plato's Atlantean kingdoms. They were bound to each other in the same manner. Quote below:
-----------------------------------

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

The Atlantean kings in the temple of Poseidon: Then they drew from the bowl in golden cups and pouring a libation on the

fire, they swore that they would judge according to the laws on the pillar,
and would punish him who in any point had already transgressed them,
and that for the future they would not, if they could help, offend against the
writing on the pillar, and would neither command others, nor obey any ruler who commanded them, to act otherwise than according to the laws of their father Poseidon. This was the prayer which each of them-offered up for himself and for his descendants, at the same time drinking and dedicating the cup out of which he drank in the temple of the god;
-----------------------------------

Both Plato's Atlanteans and Tyrian Phoenicians were bound
to their colonial descendants. Their mutual relations were regulated
by the presence of the god in his temple. Interesting similarities.

Phoenician religion was, like the Atlantean, one of the main instruments of the state and the monarchy.
They made their religion into one of the best instruments of their commercial
and colonial policy. Like all ancient peoples, the Phoenicians felt closely bound
to their gods. The god was the lord of the city and, as such, exercised his authority over the community organized around his temple.

-----------------------------------
Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

To enable a trading post to progress from a foundational stage of simple
barter to regular exchange relations with the indigenous population, the most
effective formula in ancient societies was to resort to the protection of a god
who would be respected by the natives as well, since respect for the foreigner
was dependent on the respect in which his gods were held.
The native world knew nothing about duties or markets and the political
authority of the colonists ( The king ) was ill defined as far as his power in
a foreign territory was concerned.

So we are looking at an example of unfair exchange, followed by a colonial process that introduced
the natives to training in the techniques of mineral extraction and, like every colonial system, used
the indigenous infrastructure to the benefit of the metropolis.

The god offered the conditions necessary for initiating peaceful contacts with the natives.

In exchange for all this, the god received taxes and dues in the form
of offerings, jewels and money, which were administered by the priests.
-----------------------------------

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

[i]And around the temple on the outside were placed statues of gold of all
the descendants of the ten kings and of their wives, and there were
many other great offerings of kings and of private persons, coming both
from the city itself and from the foreign cities over which they held sway.
-----------------------------------

Regards, Jonas Bergman

[This message has been edited by Jonas Bergman (edited 02-02-2004).]

Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

The Phoenician/Tyrian temple of Gades in southern Spain:the eternal flame and sacrificed
animals daily. In addition there is mention of two springs of sweet water inside the temple which, by way of
sacred basins, were used for worship.

Equally celebrated were the two bronze columns 8 cubits - a little over 3 m - tall, which flanked the temple
of Gadir, in the style of the two columns of the temple in Tyre. The story goes that the accounts of the
expenses involved in building the Gaditanian temple had been engraved on them in a few enigmatic
inscriptions that were already indecipherable in the days of Strabo.

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett
These were inscribed by the first kings on a pillar of orichalcum(copper/bronze/brass), which was situated in the middle of the island, at the temple of Poseidon,

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

1. There was an altar too, which in size and workmanship corresponded to
this magnificence, and the palaces, in like manner, answered to the greatness of the
kingdom and the glory of the temple.

1. He himself, being a god, found no difficulty in making special arrangements
for the centre island, ( the temple island ) bringing up two springs of water from beneath the earth.

2. And when they were gathered together they consulted about their common interests,
and enquired if any one had transgressed in anything and passed judgment and before they
passed judgment they gave their pledges to one another on this wise:- There were bulls who
had the range of the temple of Poseidon; and the ten, being left alone in the temple, after they
had offered prayers to the god that they might capture the victim which was acceptable to him,
hunted the bulls, without weapons but with staves and nooses; and the bull which they caught
they led up to the pillar and cut its throat over the top of it so that the blood fell upon the sacred inscription.
Now on the pillar, besides the laws, there was inscribed an oath invoking mighty curses
on the disobedient. When therefore, after slaying the bull in the accustomed manner, they
had burnt its limbs, they filled a bowl of whine and cast in a clot of blood for each of them;
the rest of the victim they put in the fire, after having purified the column all round. Then they
drew from the bowl in golden cups and pouring a libation on the fire, they swore that they
would judge according to the laws on the pillar, and would punish him who in any point
had already transgressed them, and that for the future they would not, if they could help,
offend against the writing on the pillar, and would neither command others, nor obey any
ruler who commanded them, to act otherwise than according to the laws of their father
Poseidon.

All the above mentioned Phoenician temples and customs, which reminds you of Plato's Atlanteans, are Tyrian.
They worshiped Melqart, not Poseidon
as the Atlantean did, but an very important thing we need to know is that Plato wrote that
Solon translated every name, in the Egyptian account, into the Greek language.

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

Yet, before proceeding further in the narrative, I ought to warn you,
that you must not be surprised if you should perhaps hear Hellenic names
given to foreigners. I will tell you the reason of this: Solon, who was
intending to use the tale for his poem, enquired into the meaning of the names,
and found that the early Egyptians in writing them down had translated them into
their own language, and he recovered the meaning of the several names and when
copying them out again translated them into our language. My great-grandfather,
Dropides, had the original writing, which is still in my possession, and was
carefully studied by me when I was a child. Therefore if you hear names such as
are used in this country, you must not be surprised, for I have told how they
came to be introduced.

Poseidon, the Atlantean god, was associated with the sea. He was worshiped especially in connection
with navigation, but as the god of fresh waters he also was a fertility god.
Poseidon also was the god of earthquakes, and in some areas, of horses.

Now it becomes really interesting.

Melqart, called "Lord of Tyre" or Ba'al de Sor, was god
of both fertility and the sea. The name itself means 'king of the city' ( melekqart ).
The god also represents the power of the monarchy and possess certain human characteristics, since
the foundation of cities and colonies is attributed to him.

Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

"On the coins from Tyre, Melqart appears as a sea god, mounted on a hippocampus". As god of the sea, he was the patron of shipping and trade.

If Solon saw that the Atlantean god was associated with the sea, navigation and fertility, and wanted to translate
his name into Greek, the best choice would indeed have been Poseidon.
The foundation of the kingdom and the Atlantean capital city was attributed to him.
The Atlantean Poseidon also represents the power of the monarchy.
The Tyrian Melqart is clearly a perfect match.

The foundation of Atlantis translated by Benjawin Jowett

And Poseidon,
receiving for his lot the island of Atlantis, begat children by a mortal
woman, and settled them in a part of the island, which I will describe.
Looking towards the sea, but in the centre of the whole island, there was
a plain which is said to have been the fairest of all plains and very fertile.
Near the plain again, and also in the centre of the island at a distance of about
fifty stadia, there was a mountain not very high on any side.

In this mountain there dwelt one of the earth born primeval men of that country,
whose name was Evenor, and he had a wife named Leucippe, and they had an only daughter
who was called Cleito. The maiden had already reached womanhood, when her father
and mother died; Poseidon fell in love with her and had intercourse with her,
and breaking the ground, inclosed the hill in which she dwelt all round, making
alternate zones of sea and land larger and smaller, encircling one another;
there were two of land and three of water, which he turned as with a lathe,
each having its circumference equidistant every way from the centre, so that
no man could get to the island, for ships and voyages were not as yet.
He himself, being a god, found no difficulty in making special arrangements
for the centre island, bringing up two springs of water from beneath the earth,
one of warm water and the other of cold, and making every variety of food to
spring up abundantly from the soil. He also begat and brought up five pairs
of twin male children; and dividing the island of Atlantis into ten portions,
he gave to the first-born of the eldest pair his mother's dwelling and the
surrounding allotment, which was the largest and best, and made him king over
the rest; the others he made princes, and gave them rule over many men, and a
large territory.

Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

According to the testimony of Herodotus,
who visited Tyre in the middle of the fith century BC, the worship and the temple of Melqart
had arisen at the same time as the city, so around 2300 BC ( Herodotus 2:43-44 )

Some authors have hinted at a direct link between the two pillars
of the temple in Tyre and the Pillars of Hercules at the other end
of the Phoenician world in the city of Gadir.

In the temple of Gades too there existed, next to the bronze
stelae or altars, a sacred fire and the so-called golden olive
tree of Pygmalion, adorned with emerald fruit.

The capital city of Atlantis was apparently located on a hill surrounded by water, which
I will demonstrate now.

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

and breaking the ground, inclosed the hill in which she dwelt all round,
making alternate zones of sea and land larger and smaller, encircling one
another; there were two of land and three of water, which he turned as with
a lathe, each having its circumference equidistant every way from the centre,
so that no man could get to the island,

The hill was transformed into an island ( probably only in legend, but it is still important ). The only way this could have been done
is if the hill was positioned on a river delta. It looks like an island, but it still has the characteristics of a hill.

Plato also wrote that their large, so called irrigation ditch ( a river ), emptied at the capital city. Quote below.

Quote from Critias translated by Benjawin Jowett

It received the streams which came down from the mountains,
and winding round the plain and meeting at the city,
was there let off into the sea.

The capital city "hill" of Atlantis was very clearly positioned on a river delta.

One constant factor determining the site of any early Phoenician colony in the west,
is the location on high hills surrounded by water from river deltas.

Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

We have already seen one constant factor apparently determining the site of any early Phoenician outpost
in the region: its position on a river delta. The situation on the mouth of a river implies, for one thing,
the possibility of following it upstream and, if possible, as with the Vélez, the Almanzora or the Guadalhorce,
of sailing up it. In antiquity, the river constituted the ideal communication route insofar as by simply following
it upstream it is possible to gain access to the resources of the interior and start trading with other groups.

Consequently a river means access to resources and a favourable route for commercial penetration, facilities
for the transport of merchandise, in short, the economic autonomy of the centre. But a river also means fertile
lowlands and consequently the possibility of irrigated crops.

Quote from Phoenicians and the West - by Maria Eugenia Aubet - Professor in Archaeology, Universidad Pompeu Fabra

A few kilometres further on, the Phoenician enclave of Malaka dominated the river Guadalmedina at its mouth and,
a little further on, came Toscanos, on a hill dominating the then wide bay of the river Vélez and, further east, Morro
de Mezquitilla and Chorreras on the river Algarrobo. Lastly, on the coast of Granada, Almuñécar, the ancient Sexi,
was strikingly situated on the hill of San Miguel and dominating the rivers Verde and Seco.

The most important Phoenician installation in the area was Lixus ( Morocco ), situated on a hill dominating the fertile valley of the river Loukkos, close to its mouth.

Very interesting.
Both Atlanteans and the early Phoenicians of the west, prefered to build their cities on hills surrounded by water.

Similarities between Phoenicians/Tyrians and Atlanteans

Altars, animal sacrifice, two springs of water, bronze/brass colums with inscriptions,
sacred fire, mutual relations regulated by the commands of the god, great trading stations full of ships and merchants, worship of sea and fertility god, great cities outside the straits of Gibraltar and cities positioned on high hills located in river deltas.

...................................

Warm Regards, Jonas Bergman

Perseus
I do think it is written like "ATENA", am I wrong? I saw coins with capitalized name of goddess ALFA THETA ETA NI ALPHA. May be you refer to EPSILON/ETA confusion? I think that without vowels it would be possible to see connections between ATH(!)NA and Phoenic. ANAT (there was also a NEITH somewhere?).
About Sea Peoples in Greece: I think that the Troy war (Homer's Iliad main theme) was simply another evidence of western civilization pressure against eastern ones.
Everybody was pushing to east maybe because they were pushed by someone else; and the first cause was something terrible in the western mediterranean.
The first greeks were a mix between autoctonoi (I surely missed an "h" somewhere) and incoming invaders. At that time differences were weaker.

Jonas Bergman
Yes! The ships of Tarshis! The pillars of hercules, of Milqart and of his temple!

It seems that we discovered Atlantis, just in the western mediterranean, fore-runner of Phoenician coastal empire. A very interesting investigation would be that about Carthagean Barca Family (HAnnibal And Amilcar) of finding and building a MAINLAND for Carthagean people in Spain; they understood that Rome was more powerful because of mainland backing and support while the Phoenic/Carth. coalition was in decadence and hard to recall across the mediterranean (from celts to Sicily to South Italy to Epirus, the Sea Peoples!).

Author: gene douglas (---.nas18.los-angeles2.ca.us.da.qwest.n)
Date: 03-Feb-04 16:30

Hello, everyone:

Writers Segestan, Perseus and I have crossed swords before on the subject of the Phoenicians. I have decided to describe, in as few words as possible, just who were the Phoenicians, in order to clarify this problem a bit. In the first place, the word "Phoenician" derives from the Sanskrit Pani (bargainer; miser; selfish person; thief; market) plus Ka (people). The people who hated them called them Phainikas or Panikas, or "miserly, selfish, people." I am not totally convinced that the "Phoenicians" themselves would have chosen such a name with which to identify themselves.

The so-called "Phoenicians" originated in India. When Jehovah (Chief of the Horse Tribes or Ja-ovaha as the word is pronounced in Sanskrit) broke up the large feudal estates of the Cainites, so that the nomadic Abels could settle down on their own lands, many of the Hya, Khya, Yah, Yahu, Jah, Ju (pronounced Jew), a term meaning Horse Chiefs, became Vanis or "International Traders." Thus, the term, Yavana or Javana really means, "Chiefs of the Horse Traders." These were the fathers of the Greeks. The word Greek is derived from a name of one of the ancient Hya tribes: Graikos. It is interesting to note that these Yahs or Yahves became for us, God himself! There is another Sanskrit word, Yauvana, which means "youth; young." It may also derive from "Yah" which means "fast; speedy."

I also want to add that although the ancient Hindus were not enamored of the Yavanas, the wisemen said that they were to be worshipped as gods because they were the first astronomers. The Christians and Jews kept up the tradition of worshiping the ancient Greeks (Graikos or Javans) as God himself. For us, Yahve or Ja-ovaha is the supreme deity.

Genesis does not call the Phoenicians "Phoenicians." I will quote the biblical description again, giving appropriate comments.

The descendants of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. The descendants of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah. The descendants of Javan: Elishah and Tarshish, the Kittim, and the Dodanim. FROM THESE THE MARITIME NATIONS BRANCHED OUT. (These are the descendants of Japeth) by their lands - each with its language - their clans and their nations." (Genesis 10: 2-5; Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures, published by the Jewish Publication Society).

Most of us know that Javan settled the Grecian isles. Japheth, a son of Noah, is referred to in the Hindu scriptures as Jyapeti, Yapeti, and Yayati. He is also Jupiter, Zeus, and the Hindu Dyu-Pitar (Lord of the Sky). The actual Sanskrit translation of Japheth or Jyapeti is "Father of the Horse Tribes." The Horse tribes were the North Indian Yadavas or Yahudevas who colonized the entire earth. As leaders, they were known as Khatti, Hatti, Khad, Ketu, Shetu, Harri, Khassi, Hurri, and similar terms. As the common people, they were just Ka or Kha. For example, among the Aztecs, the common people were Aztate-Ka. The gentility or ruling class were the Aztate-Katl. The common class of Toltecs were Tolte-kah. The ruling class was Tolte-kahtl. These class distinctions existed all over the ancient world.

These "Hyas" or "Khattis" were the mariner's caste, with the exclusive rights to control the seas of the world. Anyone not belonging to this caste were put to death if they were caught on the high seas. Just as nations today are going to war over oil, in ancient days, there were nations wanting to challenge the Phoenicians' caste privileges. The Romans did it successfully. After destroying Carthage, they became the new masters of the seas.

The Phoenicians were divided into different tribes and nations, such as the Hindu Eleuths who, in Greece, became the Elysians (the biblical Elisha). As the Bible says, they had their own nations, languages, and clans. Other than their common caste distinction, they did not generally feel related in any way. As the bible says, ancient mankind knew them only as sea peoples.

The barbarous people to whom Segestan and Perseus refer are the Phoenician slave caste of Tiras, Tubal, and Mesech. We find them in the Americas under basically the same name. For example, the Meshika (Mexicans) are just the descendants of that Phoenician slave caste. The following are some ancient names of the Mesech Phoenician slave caste:

Me'shech, Mes'ek, Meshekh, Mushch, Muschki, Mushki, Mishi, Muski, Mushku, Musku, Muskeva, Muska, Muskaa, Muskai, Maskali, Machar, Maskouci, Mazaca, Massagatae, Modar-es, Moskhi, Mosher, Moshch, Moschis, Mosoch, Moschi, Moschian, Mo'skhoi, Moschoi, Mosochenu, Mossynes, Mosynoeci, Moskva, Moscovy, Mas-ar, Mas-gar, Masgar, Mazar, Madj, Madjar, Makr-on, Makar, Makaroi, Merkar, Magor, Magar, Magyar, etc.

As these Mesech grew in numbers, they ultimately became the terror of the entire ancient world. According to Hindu mythology, the God Ayyappa finally had to put them all to the sword. However, many escaped to South America, becoming the Peruvian Moche.

I could elaborate on this more, but I just want to include the bare basics, so that Segestan, Perseus, and others interested in this matter, can know just who the Phoenicians really were. I feel that we must stop using the word "Phoenicians" in favor of "original maritime nations."

An Ugaritic alphabet tablet from the 14th century BC has been recovered from Ras Shamrah (=Ugarit, in Syria). The link which I am providing below contains a photo of the actual tablet, and a transcription for each of its letters.

quote from: http://www.damascus-museum.net/ancientsyria/firstugarit.htm
"Ras-Shamra alphabet : ( Syria is the birth land of the first alphabet in the world ).

I do not know, what can respected GH or GDM may say if they read the following link indicating the scale of genetic proximity (and with thanx to Res Atalante):
http://www.racearchives.com/calc/haplo_profiles.asp?dbname=ychroms&popid=12

This clearly spells that Ukrainians are nearest to one particular caste of India than any one of their own geophysical neighbors including the Belarusians.

Belarusians too find the similar perspective with reference to themselves:
http://www.racearchives.com/calc/haplo_profiles.asp?dbname=ychroms&popid=11

Here one aspect can be certain that Ukrainians or Belarusians have never migrated to India either with Alexander or with Stalin. Responsibility of Turkish invasion too can be safely ruled out for this consequence.

These roots are in the ancient past and most likely the Phoenicians or even Hittites may be the magicians. Practically both mean to be one and the same thing in this matter. This clearly indicates that Phoenicians were highly interested in the trade of skin as well and so they helped migration of shiploads of expert Indian workforce to Europe.

However GH or GDM may not fit into the mainframe. If Atlantis was Phoenician and if Phoenician was India, so India was Atlantis. This goes out of the frame. So in order for re-correction of the matter, it is better to consider that Phoenicians had nothing to do with Atlantis.

Regarding Greek-Yavan imbroglio, it may be worth noting that in olden times, the caste was no less a binding factor than the modern day Zingoism or Nationalism. Moreover the castes have spread beyond the national boundaries. So during the Atlantean times, the same type of people resided in Yava (Java) as in Greece. Some people called them as Greeks, others called them as Yavans.

I have found a website which demonstrates what the Pelasgian Greeks contributed to the alphabet. It was a substantial contribution. But nontheless, the biggest step had been taken around 1900 BC by the Phoenicians.

The link which you provided about the Phoenician alphabet/script points out that there were 30 consonants in the Ugarit/Phoenician script, at roughly 1900 BC. And at a much later date (perhaps around 800 BC, at the time of Homer and subsequent Greek writers), several of the Ugarit/semitic consonants were "changed" by Greeks to represent "vowels".

Obviously those Greeks had chosen a novel way to "pervert" both a script and an alphabet. (When I check your link, in regard to the "meaning" of the Greek letter gamma -- it says that the letter (gamma) still carries a basic meaning of "camel". Since the primitive greeks could NOT have had any camels, this tends to prove that the Greek "alphabet" originated among the Phoenicians.)

But surely it is intriguing to ask: Where did the vowels come from, and why would Greeks be interested in writing "vowels'.

Greek mythology claims that there was an alphabet of vowels, and that it was used by the MOERAE (the fates) when they were helping Zeus to overcome Baal Tsaphon (i.e. the monster Typhon).

The so-called alphabet of vowels has been a matter of amazement for several centuries.
But recently people are claiming to have decyphered the Pelasgian alphabet. It seems that the people of Lemnos (pelasgians) used an alphabet with very few letters, and may have spoken a dialect of Turkish langage; But the Lemnos alphabet was roughly 1/3 vowels, and 2/3 consonents. Here is a link which tries to identify the letters of the ancient Lemnos alphabet. http://www.compmore.net/~tntr/palphabet.gif

And here is a link which discusses decyphering a Pelasgian language, as it was used on the island of Lemnos. http://www.compmore.net/~tntr/lemstelec.html

So it seems that some early Greeks (after 1200 BC) began to use the Phoenician script for writing 2 different alphabets: one Pelasgean/Lemnos, and the other Indo-European Greek.

The Pelasgians spoke a "Turkish dialect" ?
Come on Atalante ,Thomopoulos who deciphered Pelasgians inscriptions from Lemnos find out that they were written in Greek language describing historically proved events.

Pelasgians were the first inhabitants of present Greece -Romania -Bulgaria -Turkey we say that they were Proto-Greeks ,other say that they were Pro-Greeks

The photograph on this link shows the column of Kamina was written on material that resembles orichalc (=golden chalk-stone). So I presume the column of Kamina resembles what Plato said about Atlanteans writing on orichalc.

Modern experts say the column of Kamina was written in Eteo-Cretan (which is a proto-Greek script/language), using a "nearly [or partially] Greek language".

Greek mythology explains "eteo-Cretans" by saying that some Helenistic people (Aeolians) and Pelasgians migrated to Crete after the Thera volcano colapsed ca 1470 BC. The myths explain that those Helenes (or Eteo-Cretans) ruled Crete at the time Zeus abducted Europa from Phoenicia.
quote from: http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Crete.html
"Tectamus sailed to Crete with Aeolians and Pelasgians and became king of the island. During the time when he was king of Crete, Zeus carried off Europa from Phoenicia. Tectamus was son of Dorus 1, son of Hellen 1"

The mythic claim that Europa rode on the back of a swimming ox as she left Phoenicia seems to mean that she was following the Phoenician letter alef, i.e. the head of an ox. Therefore, the Europa myth may be a cover-story for bringing the 30 letter Phoenician script/alphabet to Crete during the eteo-Cretan period (1400-600 BC).

Here is the link with the explanation of the Phoenician letters
http://www.phoenicia.org/tblalpha.html

But the chronology for Greek myths about Crete is easy to understand. Here is a table of Chronology, from one of the most reliable sources of data. http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/MythicalChronology.html

This link contains a chart for various Greek communities. It shows that king Minos and Europa MUST be placed after 1450 BC (probably a result of a flood on Crete due to the collapse of an old volcanic caldera on the island of Thera). Europa's date must be close to the date when her uncle Danaus arrived at Argos, ca 1450 BC.

The priest of Sais laughed at Solon, when Solon suggested that the Greeks knew details about the era before (roughly) 2000-1500 BC.
The chronology link which I gave in this post demonstrates why the priest was laughing at Solon.

Yes, its true that Crete was settled at a very early date. But evidently, those settlers before 1450 BC were aliens, not Greeks.

Look at this:
"Forty-five of the Linear B syllabic signs have close equivalents in Linear A, while a further ten have more doubtful parallels in the older script. There is therefore general scholarly consensus that Linear B was derived from Linear A for the purpose of writing a different, non-Minoan language which happens to have been deciphered as an early form of Greek."

A general scholarly consencus .....

[This message has been edited by Perseus (edited 02-17-2004).]

Let me add that the most ancient document in linear B was found on some pebbles recently in Kafkania near Olympia, dating to the 15th century BC. This would be the first 'proof' of presence of greek language in this region.

About linear A, many claim to have decoded it, and often it is suggested a relation to Hurrian.
Mr. Stylos claims to have found that even the printed glyphs of the Phaistos Disc are an ornate version of the linear syllabics. This greek man claims that the language of the Phaistos Disc's closest relative today would be one of the Arvanite dialects, which we find versions of in places as far away as Corsica, Italy, Libya, Asia Minor, Greece, Crete and of course Albania.
As I understand, Arvanitic in Greece is more akin to the southern Tosk than to the northern Gheg, as only Tosk is intelligible to Arvanitiki. Thus we may explain why Etruria is now called Toscana? Sea Peoples?
-----
And Perseus:
About your "Oxford"-suggestion - Bosporos. Linguists used to say this, but they have agreed to not use this explanation anymore.
Last time the cattle could wade across, would be around the dramatic changes almost 8.000 years ago. Toponyms are favoured for their extremely conservative quality, so it is not impossible that this could mean 'Oxford'.
However, I would suggest that a more likely origin for the hind part of the word is the stem *P-R-S, a pylum word that we find frequently in most strata of both Eurasian and Afro-asiatic languages.
Names like Epirus, Byrsa, Neapolis and even EdinBURgh, SingaPORe, VentsPILS, Plzen and Barossa are supposed to be of the same Pleistocene/Paleolithic origin.
And we have palace, Pallas, Palatino and Prst/Palestine.
In Greek we have obvious words like polis, pyrgos, pylos, etc.

But I argue like you, Perseus: The flooding of the Black Sea was a result of the climatic changes that allowed the Holocene and Neolithic.
So, 'cattle crossing' is a fine explanation to me, but I say this was from before 5500-6000 BC, if you talk about wading.
Cattle can also be shipped over the strait in a man-made vessel, but that was not your point, was it?
Evidence shows that agriculture then spread rapidly to the atlantic, and interestingly: By boat. But we are not talking about Noah here, the topic is Atlantis as an incident in the realm of Canaanite maritime civilization, which would be the latter part of the 2nd millennium, or later.

So, we can not avoid discussing Sea Peoples and Palasat, Minoans and Myceneans.

One thing is certain: The Phoenicians, like Dido and Jezebel, spoke a semittic language that they shared more or less with the other Canaanites and even such as the jewish folks by the time of Schlomo/Suleiman. The Philistines did not speak this language until about this time.
Gaza, Ashkelon and Tyre was founded almost simultaneously about 200-300 years before they lost their language.

My question to this forum:
What do You think about the possibility that a maritime people came to this coast, adapted the language, and then became known as Tyrians, Sidonians, Phoiniki, and just plain Kena'ani? In hebrew, Kena'ani came to mean simply traders, merchants.

If so, what language could the people of this inclination have spoken prior to their arrival in the semittic region?

We know they went to the Pelagous Atlantikous (the 'Sea of Atlas', as Plato wrote) all the time!
Egyptians were certainly not known to travel. They would leave sailing and voyage to those who were experts on -and identified with- international trade: The elusive and omnipresent 'Phoenicians'.

Was 'Atlantis' the homeland of such a people? I think we may be confused by the onthologies we carry from normative education. Research should correct some of our common assumtions...

Or what say you all?

S>>The Philistines did not speak this language until about this time.

R>>This is a strong point that relates to my suggestion of the Phoenicians coming from the Erythraenean Sea on their way "BACK" from the Polynesian islands.

S>>What do You think about the possibility that a maritime people came to this coast, adapted the language, and then became known as Tyrians, Sidonians, Phoiniki, and just plain Kena'ani? In hebrew, Kena'ani came to mean simply traders, merchants.

R>>Highly possible, I would like to think they came from the south.

S>>Egyptians were certainly not known to travel. They would leave sailing and voyage to those who were experts on -and identified with- international trade: The elusive and omnipresent 'Phoenicians'.

R>>Not So. The Egyptians were masters of sailing around 3000 bC!! I would argue that the other cultures adapted from Egyptian writing and technologies.

The real elusive sailors lie in the roots of the vikings and neanderthals who also were great builders and craftsmen. Compare and merge this with the Polynesian or Peking offsprings,Java man and we would meet somewhere say.......

........Crete would have been the focal point.

There were 3 sacred Mt Saphon's: one near Ugarit, one on the north of Egypt (which was dedicated to the god Set), and one in Spain. (Note, in Hebrew the word zephon means "north", but originally Mt Saphon referred to a mountain at the "northern" end of Canaan, not to the north pole.)

Carthage had a temple dedicated to Baal Saphon, who was the sea god of Carthage.

quote from: http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/ANE/ANE-DIGEST/1997/v1997.n238

"Check out "Typhon et Baal Saphon" by Corinne Bonnet in "Religio Phoenicia"
edited by Bonnet, C & Lipinski, E & Marchetti, P (1986) for a discussion on
these matters.

I would say that Typhon is not Evil (as in Satan evil) as much as Chaotic. There
might be some connection between Zeus fighting Typhon and Baal fighting Yam -
Baal Saphon was equated with Zeus Kasios in Hellenistic times.

Kasios was the Greek name for Mount Saphon (there was one in Syria, one in Egypt
and one in Spain - perhaps it was brought as part of a scared topography by the
Canaanites/Phoenicians). The one in Egypt is mentioned by Herodotus, the one in
Spain by Avienus "Ora Maritima" and Mt.Saphon figures heavily in the Ugaritic
texts.

Typhon was also the ancient name of the river Orontes formed by the slain body
of this serpentine creature. Here might be another connection with Ugaritic Yam
since one of his titles was Judge River.

The Phoenicians (Iron Age) seem to have looked upon Baal Saphon as a protective
marine deity e.g. the Asarhaddon treaty. Zeus Kasios is invoked in Greek on a
votive anchor of Cabo de Palos in Spain, and anchors were common votives in LBA
Cypriot and Syrian temples, among them the temple of Baal (Saphon) in Ugarit.
Baal Saphon had a temple in Carthage (see the "Marseilles tariff").

Baal seems to have been equated to Seth by both the Egyptians and Canaanites
living in Egypt (both stormgods). There's a papyrus from Egypt mentioning the
sacred barque of Baal Saphon (another maritime connection). I don't know how
Saphon became Typhon (I'm not linguist or anything), but I think that T and S
were pretty interchangeable (e.g Sur beacme Tyrus or Zoros) so to a Greek it
would sound pretty similar (?).