The implications of this discovery are potentially huge and certainly supports my past fifteen years of research. I'm pretty damned excited about this and I hope you will be too!
Figure 1. Photograph of the front of the Yeshua (Jesus) ossuary (IAA accession no. 80-503). Its perimeter dimensions are 62.7-65.0 x 25.4-26.0 30.5-31.0 centimeters. (Internet)
Figure 5. The drawing of the Hooked
X/Tau Cross monogram (Page 223 in L.Y. Rahmani’s book) shows the vertical line
of the Tau Cross is slightly off to the right when compared to the actual
carving with both carvings oriented upside down. However, the drawing shows the correct
relative position of the chevron symbol that also appears on the lid.
Figure 7. The inscription carved in Aramaic on the narrow side of ossuary IAA #80-503 reads “Yeshua bar Yehosef”, (Jesus, son of Joseph) and has a large “X” carved at the beginning of the name as Hebrew and Aramaic are read right to left. (Internet)
Figure 8. The Hooked X symbol occurs
twenty-two times on the Kensington Rune Stone; it is used for the “a” sound
within the Old Swedish runic inscription discovered in Minnesota in 1898. This example is found in the second word on
line 6. (Wolter, 2002)
Figures 9 & 10. Egyptian Pharaohs
Tutankhamen and his father Akhenaten both have the crossed Crook and Flail
across their chest which was the earliest known representation of the Hooked X
symbol and the ideology of Monotheistic Dualism it represents. (Internet)
Figure 11. This example shows the
Egyptian Ankh which is actually a Tau Cross with an egg-shaped handle. (Internet)
Figure 12. One of the most important
symbols in Royal Arch Freemasonry is the “Triple Tau” found on this Masonic
apron within the Delta and the circle, both considered symbols of the Deity
within the Craft. (Wolter, 2015)
Figure 13. The Triple Tau symbol
occurs twice on this mid-1600’s era grave slab in the floor near the altar in
the church of the ruined St. Augustine Monastery in Old Goa, India. (Wolter,
2015)
Figure 14. This stylized example of
the Christian “IHS” symbol appears on the exterior of the “Bom Jesus” Basilica
in Old Goa, India. This symbol dates
back to the Second Century and could be origin of the Triple Tau symbol found
in Royal Arch Freemasonry. (Wolter,
2015)
Reconsidering a Mark on
the Lid of the Talpiot Tomb’s Jesus Ossuary
By Scott F. Wolter P.G.
Abstract
The lid on
the “Yeshua bar Yehosef” (aka Jesus, son of Joseph) ossuary from the First
Century C.E. “Talpiot Tomb” in Jerusalem, has a prominent mark that has
received little attention. If mentioned at
all, it is typically referred to as a star and usually dismissed as something
insignificant, such as an alignment mark.
A careful examination of the mark reveals that it is actually not a
star. Rather, it appears to be a
combination of two symbols, one resembling a Tau Cross and the other a
so-called “Hooked X”. This paper will
build a case for this interpretation and demonstrate why this is an important
discovery.
Introduction
The
so-called Talpiot Tomb was discovered when it was revealed during blasting of
the bedrock comprised of a white calcareous chalk called Nari,[1] during
construction of apartment buildings in March of 1980. Excavations of the tomb were performed under
the supervision of archaeologist, Joseph Gath, and a plan diagram of the tomb
with elevations was made by an assistant archaeologist and surveyor, Shimon
Gibson. Gath discovered ten ossuaries
within the six tunnels (called kokhim) during his excavations, but only nine were
cataloged and entered into the collection at the Israeli Antiquities
Authorities (IAA, nee IDAM) storage facility.
Recent geochemical testing has confirmed the so-called “James Ossuary” is
also from the Talpiot tomb and is this missing tenth ossuary.[2]
Seven of the
ten ossuaries are inscribed with names; six in Hebrew/Aramaic and one in
Greek. The name inscribed in Greek (IAA
no. 80-500) arguably translated as “Mariamene, who is Mara” may refer to the
biblical Mary Magdalene. The six names
carved in Hebrew/Aramaic are as follows:
(IAA no.
80-501) “Yehuda, son of Yeshua” (Judah, son of Jesus)
(IAA no.
80-502) “Matya” (Matthew)
(IAA no.
80-503) “Yeshua, son of Yehosef” (Jesus, son of Joseph)
IAA no.
80-504) “Yose” (Jose/Joseph)
(IAA no.
80-505) “Marya” (Maria)
(IAA no.
80-509[3])
“Ya’aqob son of Yoseph, brother of Yeshua” (James, son of Joseph, brother of
Jesus)
This amazing
cluster of names carved on burial ossuaries from a single tomb has led many
(including the author of this paper) to conclude this is the family burial tomb
of the biblical Jesus, other members of his family and potentially his wife
Mary Magdalene. Much controversy and
research on the inscriptions carved on the ossuaries has occurred in the wake
of the discovery over the past 35 years, but very little has been said about
the marks carved on the lids, including two marks on the lid of the “Yeshua bar
Yehosef” ossuary. Although sketches of
these two marks carved on the “Yeshua bar Yehosef” lid were published in 1994,[4]
photographs taken by Charles Pellegrino in 2005 are the first-ever photographs
of the marks to be published (Figures 2, 3 and 4). This paper appears to be the first attempt to
interpret the meaning of the mark that some had taken to be a simple star.
The Discovery
In May of
2014, a fellow independent researcher named Jerry Lutgen, introduced the author
in an email that included five photographs taken by Charles Pellegrino, of a
mark inscribed on the lid of the “Yeshua bar Yehosef” ossuary (Figure 1). In this email Pellegrino described the mark
as, “…a seven pointed star with one of the points diverging into a
"V."” Immediately upon reviewing
the photos the author saw not a single “star” mark, but two very familiar
symbols intertwined into a single monograph and wrote the following in his
response to Lutgen and Pellegrino:
“The "star" carving on the
Jesus ossuary lid looks like a monogram to me of two separate symbols; a
"T" and my Hooked X. Of
course, I may be seeing what I want to see, but the top bar/line of the
"T" is slightly below the intersecting lines in the middle of the
X. What do you think?”
Soon after
sending the email it occurred to the author this “T” was most likely a Tau
Cross, so that the mark was actually the combination of a “Hooked X” and a Tau
Cross. The rationale for reaching this
conclusion is presented below.
Pellegrino
pointed out there are actually two separate marks carved on the Yeshua ossuary
lid, the Hooked X/Tau Cross monogram and a chevron. He also pointed out there are no known
photographs of these marks on the lid other than Pellegrino’s. The second mark carved on the lid, a low-angle
(approximately 25 degrees) chevron, does appear faintly in one of the
photographs sent by Pellegrino (Figure 4).
The faintly visible chevron is confirmed by its position relative to the
Hooked X/Tau Cross as drawn in a sketch that appears on page 223 of the L.Y.
Rahmani’s, catalogue. The up-side down orientation
of the Rahmani sketch confirms the lack of understanding of the meaning of the Hooked
X/Tau Cross symbol. However, the author’s
drawing of the Hooked X/Tau Cross monogram (Figure 6) showing its centered
positioning on the ossuary lid suggests the carver intentionally placed the
symbol at the top end of the lid immediately adjacent to the short side of the
ossuary with the inscribed name, “Yeshua bar Yehosef”, and a large “X” symbol carved in front
of it (Figure 7).
On March 18,
2015, the author personally viewed the Yeshua ossuary lid, while it was on
display in the Dead Seas Scrolls exhibit in Los Angeles, California. The ossuary section of the exhibit included
the Yeshua ossuary which was positioned with the Hooked X/Tau Cross symbol clearly
visible only a few inches from the Plexiglas divider. However, the direct overhead lighting made viewing
the chevron symbol very difficult although the more deeply carved Hooked X/Tau
Cross was clearly visible.
“Mason’s Marks” or “Maker’s Marks”
One of the
arguments sure to be made against the Hooked X/Tau Cross interpretation for this mark will be that
it is a known practice to use marks,
such as small X’s or “star-like” marks on ossuaries as a way to align the
placement of the lids onto the limestone burial boxes. On pages 19-21 of L. Y. Rahmani’s Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries, he
discusses these marks found on approximately 40% of the ossuaries listed in his
catalogue. Rahmani states, “Most of the
marks on ossuaries are incised or drawn with charcoal. They usually occur in pairs, one on the lid
and the second on either the narrow side or rim of the chest or occasionally on
the chest’s long side.” The Hooked X/Tau
Cross symbol does not have a corresponding mark on the rim or narrow side and looks
to have been carved with considerably more care and skill than the aforementioned
chevron as well as the name and “X” symbol carved on the narrow side of the chest. Nearly all the examples of paired or single
direction marks in Rahmani’s catalogue are rather crudely made. In Kloner and Gibson’s article they termed
the two marks on the Yeshua lid to be “maker’s marks” writing in a footnote,
“Indeed, some of the marks may have been made by family members at the same
time they inscribed the names.”[5] In light of this it’s possible the carver of
the Hooked X/Tau Cross monogram could have been the maker of the ossuary, a
family member at the time of interment, or even an intruder into the tomb at an
unknown date. Further, because of the differences
in the quality of the carvings it appears certain that whoever carved the
Hooked X/Tau Cross was not the same person who carved the Yeshua name and the
“X” on the ossuary.
Interpretations of the Hooked X Part
of the Monogram
The upper
symbol within the monogram is an “X” with an extra bar added to the upper right
arm that forms a well-known and controversial symbol called a “Hooked X”
(Outlined in red in figure 3).[6] The author coined the term “Hooked X” in
2002, and has written extensively about the symbol which first became known to
him during his examination of the Kensington Rune Stone (Figure 8), discovered
in Minnesota in 1898, at his materials forensic laboratory, American
Petrographic Services, Inc., beginning in July of 2000.[7] The Hooked X symbol appears twenty-two times and
is used for the letter “a” and “a” sound within the Kensington inscription that
is carved using medieval Scandinavian runes.
Since its discovery in 1898 scholars noted that the “Hooked X” symbol
had never been seen used in a runic inscription (which led to their persistent
belief it was a hoax). Subsequent
research by the author, various scholars, and other researchers into various
aspects of the artifact, including the geology, runes, language, dialect,
grammar, dating and history of the discovery has provided voluminous evidence
consistent with it being a genuine medieval artifact.[8]
Four more
runic inscriptions were subsequently discovered in North America that included
the Hooked X symbol.[9] Three rune stones were found buried together at
Spirit Pond, Maine, in 1971, and a two-line, nine character runic inscription
with a Hooked X carved into a multi-ton sandstone boulder in Narragansett Bay
that was documented as early as circa 1945.
Two of the three Spirit Pond Rune Stones are dated to 1401 and 1402
(twice) using the medieval Easter Table dating method.[10] The Kensington Rune Stone is dated to 1362,
once using Pentadic numbers in Arabic placement, and 1362 again by plotting
singled out characters within the inscription into the medieval Easter Table.[11] The Narragansett Rune Stone has no
discernable date within its inscription.
The author
has written three books that chronicle his research into several controversial
artifacts that include all five North American rune stones with the Hooked X, and
numerous other examples of the Hooked X found in Europe. Based on the fact the Hooked X is found
associated with only the Medieval
Knights Templar order, the associated Cistercian religious order and modern Freemasonry,
the author has concluded the symbol served a dual function in the known
examples. Besides being used for the “a”
sound, the symbol also occurs used as the Roman numeral ten.[12] In his 2009 book, the author proposed the
Hooked X was also symbolic of a religious ideology called Monotheistic Dualism
that dated back to at least circa 1350 B.C.E., and the time of Egyptian Pharaoh
Akhenaten. The author also suggested a
very early rendition of the Hooked X symbol was the crossed Crook and Flail
(Figure 9 & 10).
The presence
of the Hooked X symbol on the ossuary of what many scholars now accept as the
First Century biblical Jesus could be evidence that is consistent with many
researchers’ belief in his Egyptian heritage.
It could also provide an important clue to the true religious ideology
that Jesus, his apparent wife, Mary Magdalene and their followers were
teaching.
Interpretations of the Tau Cross Part
of the Monogram
The top horizontal
bar of the “T” shaped Tau Cross appears to have been intentionally carved just
slightly below the intersection of the two longest lines forming the Hooked X thus
creating two separate symbols carved together into a single monogram. The Tau Cross also has Egyptian origins
starting off as a large “T” shaped flood gauge for measuring the water level of
the Nile River.[13] The lifeblood of the people of Egypt was
directly dependent on the rise and fall of the Nile. If the water in the spring was to low there
would be drought and famine among the people.
If too high, floodwaters would destroy their stores and homes leading to
destruction of the people. The T-shaped
flood gauge became an important symbol of life and later a talisman in Egyptian
culture believed to avert evil and ward away sickness and disease. A loop was added to the Tau Cross making it
one of the most common and important symbols in all of ancient Egypt; the ankh
was symbolic of eternal life (Figure 11).
Curiously,
the Tau Cross is one of the most important symbols in Royal Arch Freemasonry
where three Tau Crosses are joined together where the bottom ends are joined at
a central point to produce what is called the “Triple Tau.” The Triple Tau is found within a Delta and a circle;
both considered symbols of the Deity, in the top center of the flap on the
Masonic apron of a Royal Arch Freemason (Figure 12). One can’t help but notice both the Triple Tau
on the Masonic apron and the Hooked X/Tau Cross on the Yeshua ossuary lid are
both in the same relative position; centered at the top. The Royal Arch Degree of Freemasonry deals
with the legend of the Knights Templar digging down nine levels under the
Temple Mount in Jerusalem where they reportedly found treasure. Some rumors say the treasure included gold,
scrolls, maps, navigation instruments, the Ark of the Covenant and the Delta of
Enoch, a triangle of gold with the immutable name of the Creator inscribed in
Hebrew letters, Yod, Hey, Vuv, Hey, inside a cube of agate.[14]
The Triple
Tau symbol dates back to before the
official origin of English Freemasonry in 1717 (Figure 13).[15] One can’t help but wonder if the symbol is
somehow connected to the Christian “IHS” symbol that began in the First Century
as “IH” which is identical to the Triple Tau symbol. The original meaning of the symbol was the
“T” over the “H” emblem which meant Templum Hierosolymӕ or the Temple of
Jerusalem. The symbol can also be seen
as “I” over “H” and a First Century Christogram of the Greek letters, I (iota)
and H (eta), the first two letters for the name “Jesus.” Reportedly, an “S” was added in the Second
Century creating the well-known symbol of the Christian “IHS” (Figure 14).
Interpretation of the Monogram Taken
as “Alpha-Omega”
Many have
speculated the Hooked X symbol is a carved-into-stone with straight lines
version of the Hebrew “Aleph,” the first character in the Hebrew/Aramaic
alphabet. The Tau is the nineteenth
character in the Greek alphabet, but it is also related to the Hebrew Taw (and
Aramaic Tav) which would have been the last character of the Hebrew Alphabet. If so, the monogram on the lid could be
equivalent to “Alpha-Omega, the beginning and the end.” It’s long been known in the Bible that Jesus
said, “I am the beginning and the end.”
Perhaps this pre-C.E. 70 symbol is evidence that this biblical passage was
accurately recorded, as spoken by Jesus.
Conclusions
The
discovery of the Hooked X/Tau Cross on the lid of the Yeshua ossuary from the
Talpiot Tomb could turn out to be as historically important as the recent
inclusion of “James” ossuary as a tenth ossuary discovered in, and looted from
the Talpiot Tomb.[16] The author’s fifteen years of research into
who carved the Kensington, Spirit Pond, and Narragansett Rune Stones led
directly to the medieval Cistercians, the Knights Templar, to modern
Freemasonry, to Jerusalem at the time of the Crusades and the biblical Jesus
and the evolving theory that he was married to Mary Magdalene. To find what appears to be the Hooked X
carved on the lid of the Yeshua ossuary could be a major historical discovery
that is consistent with much of the speculative research the author has already
published. The Hooked X/Tau Cross discovery
and it’s apparent connection of the Hooked X to the American Rune Stones, the
Cistercians/Knight Templar, and Freemasonry could also be interpreted as
factual evidence that is consistent with the Talpiot Tomb being that of the
Biblical Jesus, Mary Magdalene, and other family members. However, a lot more scientific work on the lid
carvings needs to be done. Several
important questions need to be addressed. When were the carvings made? Were the symbols carved onto the lid at the
time of interment or were they added later when the tomb was entered at some
point after it was no longer used for burials as some have suggested? The author is hopeful of performing a number
of scientific procedures, including three-dimensional digital microscopy on all
of the ossuaries in the near future in order to shed more light on these and
other questions.
[1]
Charlesworth, 2013, Page 32.
[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/05/world/middleeast/findings-reignite-debate-on-claim-of-jesus-bones.html?_r=0
[4]
L.Y. Rahmani, A Catalogue of Jewish
Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel, Jerusalem, 1994.
[6]
The phrase “Hooked X” was trademarked (Register No. 4,380,468) by Scott F. Wolter on August 6, 2013.[7] The details of the investigation into the geological aspects of the Kensington Rune Stone performed by Wolter can read in his 2006 book listed in the bibliography.
[8] Hundreds of articles, papers and books have been published about the Kensington Rune Stone since its discovery, but the geological findings led geologist, Newton H. Winchell, the first State Geologist of Minnesota (1875-1900), to conclude the artifact was genuine. On December 15, 1909, he wrote to the Museum Committee of the Minnesota Historical Society, “I have personally made a topographical examination of the place where the Kensington rune stone was found, and of the region northward to Pelican Lake where the skerries are located, to which the inscription refers, and I am convinced from the geological conditions, and the physical changes that the region has experienced probably within the last five hundred years that the said stone is not a modern forgery and must be accepted as a genuine record of an exploration in Minnesota at the date stated in the inscription.”
[9] Wolter, 2009, Pages 71-96.
[10] Wolter, 2009, Pages 76-78.
[11] Wolter, 2009, Pages 34-37.
[12] Wolter, 2013, Page 214.
[13] Jones, 1957/1991, Page 235.
[14] Mackey, 1921, Page 244-5.
[15] At least five examples of the Triple Tau symbol were found by the author on early to mid-1600’s era grave slabs in the ruined church in the St. Augustine Monastery (four examples), and in the St. Francis of Assisi Church (one example) in Old Goa, India, in May of 2015. Both churches and the monastery were built by the Portuguese Templars then called the Order of Christ.
[16] Charlesworth, 2013, Pages 43-45.
References
Charlesworth,
James H., The Tomb of Jesus and His
Family: Exploring Ancient Jewish Tombs Near Jerusalem’s Walls, William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan/Cambridge, U.K., 2013.
Jacobovici, Simcha and Charles Pellegrino, The Jesus Family Tomb: The Discovery, the Investigation, and the Evidence that Could Change History, Harper Collins Books, New York, N.Y. 2007.
Jones, Bernard E., Freemasons’ Book of the Royal Arch, AERRP Books Limited, Kent, Britain, 1957/1991.
Mackey, Albert G. M.D., Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences Comprising the Whole Range of Arts, Sciences and Literature as Connected with the Institution, The Masonic History Company, New York, N.Y., and London, England, 1921.
Rahmani, L.Y., A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel, Jerusalem, The Israel Antiquities Authority; The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1994.
Tabor, James
D. and Simcha Jacobovici, The Jesus
Discovery: The New Archaeological Find that Reveals the Birth of Christianity, Simon
& Schuster, New York, N.Y., 2012.
Wolter, Scott F., The Kensington Rune Stone: Compelling New Evidence, Lake Superior Agate Inc., Chanhassen, Minnesota, 2006.
Wolter, Scott F., The Hooked X: Key to the Secret History of North America, North Star Press of St. Cloud, Inc., St, Cloud, Minnesota, 2009.
Wolter, Scott F., Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers: Mysteries of the Hooked X, North Star Press of St. Cloud, Inc., St. Cloud, Minnesota, 2013.
This is going to take a little time to digest ---- this just keeps on going ---- cheers
ReplyDeleteDave,
ReplyDeleteIt took me a while to wrap my head around this too. It's still hard to believe even though I've seen it with my own eyes. In many ways it validates much of the work I've done while opening a bunch of new doors for inquiry. It really is an exciting discovery that some scholars in the biblical community have already embraced. My interpretations are going to take some time to sink in, but much of what the skeptics said was nonsense and impossible isn't so silly anymore.
It'll be interesting to hear the debunkers try to explain this one away.
Scott,
ReplyDeleteI am a big fan of your work. I have two questions:
First, how does this new discovery relate/coincide with your previous theory that the Templars may have transported Jesus and/or Magdalene's bones to the New World.
And an unrelated question: Have you ever considered using metal detectors to survey your sites in America? I think the use of metal detectors could provide amazing evidence at sites which you believe pre-columbian Europeans have made contact. Imagine finding a French-Templar coin in Minnesota, Arizona, Maine or Massachusetts. It could be "ground-breaking".
Roman coins have been found in Venezuela and Maine.
DeleteRoman coins were found in Texas at the bottom of an Indian mound at Round Rock. The mound is dated at approximately 800 AD.
In 1957 near Phenix City, Alabama, a small boy found a coin in a field from Syracuse on the island of Sicily, and dating from 490 B.C.
In the town of Heavener, Oklahoma, another out-of-place coin was found in 1976. Experts identified it as a bronze tetradrachm originally struck in Antioch, Syria in 63 A.D. and bearing the profile of the emperor Nero.
Ads
In 1882, a farmer in Cass County, Illinois picked up a bronze coin later identified as a coin of Antiochus IV, one of the kings of Syria who reigned from 175 B.C. to 164 B.C., and who is mentioned in the Bible.
http://www.gloriafarley.com/chap11.htm
Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI think this discovery only helps the thesis that somebody entered the tomb and collected at least some of the Jesus and MM bones. One possibility is of course the Knights Templar entering the tomb at the time of the First Crusade. To me, they either saw the Hooked X/Tau Cross on the lid and incorporated it into their North American operations as that is when it begins to appear or they carved the monogram onto the lid in the twelfth century. Future 3D microscopic examinations might shed light on this question.
Metal detector use at many sites is a very good idea and I think you'll likely see that in upcoming shows.
Thanks for the response Scott, very interesting. I will be interested in your upcoming shows as well.
DeleteThere is a large community of metal detector enthusiasts in the states and overseas. There are a number of forums we use to discuss our finds. You may find some interesting information searching through these sites.
Here's a thread that I started on the subject:
http://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=219052
Maybe it will lead to some new information. Good luck Scott!
PS If you're ever on the east coast I would be glad to help!
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteA few ideas came to mind while reading. Could this be a compass and square??? I believe the crook and flail could be used as a compass. I idea I call the "Royal Compass". The "T" could easily be seen as a square.
When you mentioned the number 19, the moon immediately came to mind. As in the name of the Mayan King 19 Rabbit. Seems important as, I keep coming across Lunation Triangles, and Lunar alignments, along with the numbers 5, 8, 13, 18, 19, 40 and 7. I understand the 5, 8, 13, and 40 relate to Venus with the 18 and 19 being key lunar numbers. Seems like everything boils down to personified astronomy, and the numbers involved.
I first came across the "Hooked X" and one version of the Hooked V on a coin, a friend inherited. I emailed you the pictures I'd taken of it, I still don't have it all deciphered yet. I have found many similarities between symbolism on the coin and various symbolism presented on AU. I believe most all of the symbolism is astronomical in meaning. Like two people being the living embodiment of a preexisting astronomical ideal.
Looking forward to a new show.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
"This amazing cluster of names carved on burial ossuaries from a single tomb has led many (including the author of this paper) to conclude this is the family burial tomb of the biblical Jesus, other members of his family and potentially his wife Mary Magdalene."
ReplyDeleteConsidering how common such names were, you're on tenuous grounds here right from the get go. Though you peppered your paper with the appearance of an academic study, it was truly prepared for the uneducated. No?
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteWith the addition of the "James Ossuary" the odds of this cluster of names NOT being that of the family of the biblical Jesus is 600,000 to one. I would invite you to read the scholarly papers in James Charlesworth's book about the names on the ossuaries in the tomb, most are certainly not common at all for that time.
Tenuous? There were only between 15-20,000 people living in Jerusalem in the First Century. I realize this is a difficult thing for some people of the Christian faith to accept, but the facts have spoken, this is the family tomb of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and members of their immediate family.
Uneducated? Go back and read the paper again, slowly this time.
James Charlesworth himself will tell you how common the name Jesus was; sort of like "Bob" is today. Joseph as well. And where did James come from? That was more a wrinkle than a confirmation. Though I'm not a Christian as you suspect, I don't recall Jesus' brother James playing a part in the Bible.
ReplyDeleteI did not mean offense by my claim that your paper was written for laypersons. It was simply my intuitive observation. Have you the support from those such as Charlesworth? Though you bring him up, I do not believe he would follow you down your chosen path. Was your paper submitted to any other scholars of renown? I would be open to correction in this regard if applicable.
Anonymous,
DeleteAll seven names are found to be connected to Jesus and his family. To get a better understanding of the controversy, trial, testing performed by geologist, Aryeh Shimron, on the "James Ossuary" I suggest you read the article linked to footnote number 2.
My paper is currently has been or is currently being reviewed by a number of biblical scholars and researchers such as James Tabor, Simcha Jacobovici, Jerry Lutgen, Charles Pellegrino, Mike Elliot and other blind reviewers.
"
DeleteMy paper is currently has been or is currently being reviewed by a number of biblical scholars and researchers such as James Tabor, Simcha Jacobovici, Jerry Lutgen, Charles Pellegrino, Mike Elliot and other blind reviewers."
Ah, preaching to the choir, no doubt. But what do you mean by "blind" review? Your paper above references your own work in a way that can only serve to identify the "author".
Anonymous,
DeleteBlind means I don't know who the reviewers are. I don't know what you mean by your last comment, but it's clear you have no objectivity in this discussion.
I’m getting tired of this; there are people who just won’t accept even the possibility that the Talpiot Tomb could be the burial place of Jesus and his family. I’m not asking you to believe this now, just open your mind to the possibility that it could be.
DeleteFirst of all, what do we know about the burial of Jesus from the Bible? That Jesus was taken down from the cross, the body wrapped and placed in a rock burial cave owned by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a wealthy merchant. This sounds like the procedure that would have been used to prepare a body for eventual burial in an ossuary; the body would have been placed on a shelf in the burial cave and left there for a period of time, the bones would have then been collected and placed in an ossuary. This method of burial was used in Israel for only about 100 years, and that time period was during the life of Jesus so he could have been buried in this manner. This would also explain how Jesus and his family could have afforded this sort of burial, this was not originally to be their tomb, it was carved out to be Joseph’s and he was a wealthy man and possibly a follower of Jesus.
Now about those names: Yes, many of those names were common names during this time period. But there have been more than one study done concerning the probability of all of those names being found in one tomb and it not being the Jesus family tomb. They all seem to show the same thing, that if you look at it with an open mind, there is a high probability that it is. That does not mean that the people who did these studies believe that this is the Jesus family tomb only that the odds favor it.
Concerning the James controversy: There are several persons named James mentioned in the New Testament, there is even a James that is identified as the brother of Jesus, the question is could one of them actually be a brother of Jesus. Could James be a son of Joseph by an earlier marriage, since it’s believed that Joseph was a widower when he married Mary, this would make James a step-brother of Jesus. Could James be a younger brother of Jesus, the son of Mary and Joseph, making him a half-brother of Jesus. Or could James be a cousin of Jesus, but called brother, because the term ‘cousin’ was not one used in this time, in fact they may not have even had a word for it. This controversy has engaged scholars for decades with no resolution in sight, only more papers and discussions of all these theories.
Personally, I don’t know if the Telpiot Tomb is the Jesus Family tomb or not, but I’m open minded enough to consider the possibility that it could be. I also consider it a pity that the bones contained in those ossuaries were buried in an unmarked grave, as it done with all bones contained in ossuaries found in Israel. If they hadn’t been we would be able to do DNA studies to determine the relationships between all of these people as well as carbon dating to determine how old they really are. Sorry, Scott, the stones can only tell us so much in this case. If it could be proved, with a DNA test, that the bones in the Jesus ossuary was the father of the bones contained in the Judah, son of Jesus ossuary and the bones contained in the ossuary identified with Mary Magdalene was Judah’s mother, that would be something.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteYou hit on all of your points quite well, but missed on the last one. Bone fragments with partial strands of DNA have been collected from the Yeshua and Mary Magdalene ossuaries. These strands contained enough data to conclude the two individuals were not related. This doesn't prove they were married, but is certainly consistent with that premise.
I get tired of the close-mindedness of many scholars who still scoff when the facts are punching them in the face (see Kensington Rune Stone). This is nothing new to me, but to discovery the Hooked X associated with what is likely the biblical Jesus is something I didn't see coming. The significance likely won't be realized and accepted until after I'm dead, but it will all come together someday.
The discovery of the Jesus family tomb is a defining moment in human history and it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.
Thanks you for your prompt reply, Scott, but call that a partial miss. I am aware of the results of the DNA tests for those two bone fragments but they tell us nothing other than those two people were not related. They don’t tell us, for example, if they were the parents of Judah, which would also increase the probability that they were married. Nor do they tell us their relationship to the other people contained in the tomb. How many of the people in this tomb could have been proved to be the children of Mary? As I remember, there were several unmarked ossuaries in that tomb. Could one of them have been a sister of Jesus, for example, or even another brother and that proved by DNA? Could the James buried there been proved to be the son of Mary or even not closely related at all? And what of the other people buried there, was there a family relationship with them at all, or were some of them unrelated? All we can do right now is guess and discuss the possibilities. How much different would it be if we had those bones and could get the answers.
DeleteI, like you, get tired of people who are that close-minded that they won’t even consider the possibility that this, and other things, could be true. They just shut down and won’t even think about it. But look at it this way, at one time they didn’t believe that the earth revolved around the sun or that germs even existed. Eventually, people may come around and start looking at things in a new light, even if this happens far in the future.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteWhat happened to the tomb from a scientific standpoint is nothing short of tragic. The archaeologists did a shoddy job of recording details and the throwing the bones into a mass grave makes me almost cry. However, we can't look back and agonize over what we can't do anything about now. We have to happy with the information we do have which is still quite a bit.
There were three ossuaries of the 10 that did not have names. There is still human biological material preserved in the boxes and perhaps technological advances in DNA testing in the future will make it possible to get proper samples to answer these questions. Time will tell.
Scott,
DeleteAll true, Scott, but to give the archaeologists on this site a bit of cover, it was on a construction site that the tomb was found. And trust me, construction companies hate to be held up for a long term archaeological dig, they just want to build that building as quickly as possible. There are times they don’t even tell anyone when they discover something, it does come out later but by then it is too late to do anything about it. In this case, they at least gave the archaeologists a short time in which to do some excavations, but they were probably pushing them to get done as fast as possible.
By the way, have you heard that the widow of the archaeologist, Yosef Gat, on that site said that he believed that this was the Jesus Family Tomb? She supposedly made the claim at some point after his death, but there you have it. The archaeologist who excavated the tomb thinks you are correct in your analysis.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteOf course he knew it was Jesus' tomb, but I understand why he denied it being worried about the repercussions for the rest of his life which wasn't very long. Trust me, they all know whose tomb it is including the Israeli authorities. They just don't know how to handle it.
Scott,
DeleteNo, they don’t know how to handle it at all. To even admit that it might be the Jesus Family Tomb would create a political football to end all political footballs. So they deny it and claim it just can’t be. It’s all tied up with tourism and politics and there isn’t much one can do about that, at least not yet.
Nice chatting with you again, Scott.
Irene
Thank you Irene; stop by anytime.
Deletelooks like an alignment mark to me
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
DeleteThe overwhelming consensus of ossuary experts is it is definitely not an alignment mark. There is no companion mark on the box as is required and alignment marks are quickly and crudely done. This is a carefully carved monogram placed in top-center position of the lid.
This is definitely NOT an alignment mark.
The companion mark may have been done in a non-permanent fashion. Charcoal was common for such purposes.
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteThere is no precedent for this and it doesn't make sense to have one alignment mark carved and the other made with charcoal. They would be both carved or charcoaled. Swing and miss.
It would certainly be a more rational explanation than secret codes, goddess worship, Templars and a marriage of Jesus and Mary M. There are plenty of other more rational explanations, such as a maker's mark or alignment for placement within the tomb. Simpler is always preferred over the fantastic and unverified.
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteThe facts are what they are, but you have clearly chosen to ignore them and try to impose your personal beliefs. You are welcome to believe whatever you want. However, these comments add nothing of merit to the discussion.
Scott, I love your work & your show! You always give us so much to think about! It's very fascinating!
ReplyDeleteI'm curious if anyone has ever researched if there are any connections between the male XY & the female XX chromosomes with the Hooked X, Venice/Goddess worship or Templars?
Thanks for doing the hard work & making it all look easy!
Smiles :)
Carla
Carla,
DeleteWe have looked into that idea and it makes a lot of sense. It makes you wonder how much knowledge these people had and how they would have learned it.
Glad you're enjoying the shows.
Do you plan on publishing a book on your findings in the future? I'd like to read more on this discovery.
ReplyDeleteTiffany,
ReplyDeleteYes, but not until we've had a chance to closely examine the inscriptions using 3D microscopic imaging technology. The likely won't happen until 2016, but I'm excited about the opportunity of what we might learn. I remember the surprising discoveries we made after examining the Kensington Rune Stone inscription in 2002. The digital photo-library revealed numerous mysterious punch marks and short line additions that led to our discovery of the Dating Code, the Grail Code and other still yet to be deciphered anomalies.
Stay tuned; who knows what will happen?
Sounds good. It'd be interesting to know if there was a link between Jesus and the Knights Templar considering one came before the other but it makes me wonder if this hooked x symbol was taken by the Knights Templar in representation of Christ. We know they were formed in the Middle Ages but it does make me wonder if there weren't protectors of christ's bloodline before them. Were they Knights Templar as well? These are some of the questions I'm itching to know. Maybe I'm a rambling bafoon but if there's been a group of people dating back to christ's time that has been protecting the holy grail all this time I'd sure like to know.
ReplyDeleteTiffany,
DeleteI think there is a very strong possibility the Templars were in the Talpiot Tomb and they saw the Hooked X on the lid when they collected all or some of Jesus' bones. It's also possible they carved the monogram on the lid. We are hoping our future testing might answer these questions.
The people who protected the bloodline descendants of Jesus and Mary before the Templars were their descendants and their followers. Historically, they would have kept their ancestry a secret until they initiated the greatest coup in history by taking over the Cistercian monastic order and align with the Roman Catholic Church.
"Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" and that's exactly what they did at the start of the twelfth century.
“The people who protected the bloodline descendants of Jesus and Mary before the Templars were their descendants and their followers.” Probably only some of their followers, Scott.
DeleteLet’s face it; the early Christian Church was a mess. There were several factions, with slightly different beliefs, and all of them vying for primacy. One of those beliefs, still believed today, for example, was the perpetual virginity of Mary,. Now what if some of those protectors of the bloodline were the descendants of the siblings of Jesus? Could they really claim to be descendants of Mary without running the risk of being killed? I won’t even go into what could have happened to actual descendants of Jesus and Mary. And we can’t forget about the Roman Empire either.
No, those descendants of Jesus and Mary, and those that were closely related to them, would have kept very quiet about that relationship. Later, when this group acquired real power of their own, they could try and shape conditions under which they had more safety. In the Middle Ages, they tried to do this within the system that existed at the time but they were attacked and almost destroyed because of the greed of a king. In the end they decided that they needed to create their own system of governance, which many believe they did with the founding of the United States.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteYou hit the nail on the head; that's pretty much what Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers was all about.
"Irene" is a plant known to you whose back and forth was done solely to drown out legitimate criticism.
ReplyDeleteSeriously? You're kidding right?
DeleteYour back and forth does occur rather quickly given your past monitoring of this board. Like maybe you're in the same house? Is Irene Mrs. Wolter? Wow, that's like a conspiracy within a conspiracy (and more plausible than anything in your "paper").
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteNow you sound like a complete fool. Just stop already.
Dear Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteIs this what you have descended to, you can’t refute facts that I posted so you attack me and call me a ‘plant’? Don’t you realize that by doing that you’ve already lost whatever arguments you might have made? Personally, I would have welcomed comments from you, as long as they were done in a respectful manner. I’m not expecting you to agree with me, only give me the courtesy of disagreeing in a civil manner. If, however, you attack me or become belligerent, I will respond in kind.
For the record, I don’t know Scott Wolter, I have never spoken to him in my life. My sole interaction with him as been on this blog, where everyone can read what we posted since it is all very public. I will admit that if he were ever in the New York City area again I’d buy him a beer, if he’d let me. But no, I have never met the man or set anything up with him concerning this blog.
Now this ‘plant’ has a life and needs to get a couple of things done this evening. I wasn’t even going to post anything at all but I could not let this go without a response. By the way, what sort of ‘plant’ did you have in mind? Roses, I hope.
Later
Irene
Mr. Wolter,
ReplyDeleteDo you think the symbol above the tomb could be a bow compass?
Thanks,
Scott F
Scott,
ReplyDeleteIt certainly could be. As you probably know, symbols can mean different things to different people, there usually isn't one set meaning. I see the chevron circle as Gothic Church architecture, but it certainly means more than just that.
Gothic as in the Knight Templars might have carved the symbols?
DeleteThank you for answering my questions. Big fan of the shows and books.
Keep up the great work!
Scott,
DeleteI don't think the Templars carved the symbols above the entrance to the burial chamber; I think they saw the symbols that were carved in the First Century as they entered the tomb and then incorporated it into their church and cathedral architecture with the gabled roof over the rose window.
You see that architecture everywhere.
Scott,
ReplyDeleteI have a couple of questions for you.
`
If you can actually study these ossuaries the way you want to, how closely would you be able to date the carvings on them? I know that with carbon dating you would get a result that would be expressed as a date and with a plus and minus. Using these ossuaries as an example, if you had been able to carbon date any bone matter found in them you may have gotten a result that would be expressed as something like 50 AD/CE +- 40 years, meaning that the person whose bones you tested died as early as 10 AD/CE or as late as 90 AD/CE. Can you get results this close in dating carvings or would you only be able to state that the carvings could have been done 2,000 years ago but certainly weren’t done 200 years ago. I realize that some of this may depend on exactly what instruments you can use to do this but generally speaking how close a date can you get with some of the test you can perform?
The next question concerns the carvings themselves. Is there any way you can tell if they were carved by the same person? With handwriting you can see how people form their letters and use that to authenticate handwriting or detect forgeries. Is there any way you can see how the letters were formed to determine if the same person carved them. After all, a number of these ossuaries contain the same letters and one would think that, if the same person carved the all the names, those letters would be formed in a similar manner in all of those ossuaries. And to be honest, I wouldn’t expect that they would. This is a multi-generational family tomb after all and one would have expected that the family members died at different times and therefore different people carved the names on those ossuaries. For all I know, this has been done and I just never heard that it was, but if it wasn’t, it would be something to look for.
Any thoughts?
Irene
Mr. Wolter has already declared the find as the legitimate burial site for Jesus and family; including Mary Magdalene, who he believes conclusively was married to Jesus. Any science that follows would be necessarily corrupted by his preconceived beliefs, though I believe it highly unlikely he would ever get the chance to perform any testing.
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteTo draw a conclusion after a careful review of the available evidence is what a forensic scientist does. In this case, reaching the conclusion I have wasn't difficult at all.
The work I'll be doing isn't related to determining who the people are in the boxes, that has already been determined by others and I happen to agree with that conclusion. Your assumption of preconceived bias has no merit.
I agree, it wasn't difficult for you to reach that conclusion. You may find true scholars who may be open to the possibility, but only fringe authors such as yourself cling to it as established fact.
DeleteSo why bother confirming the dates of the inscriptions? Like the KRS, linguists and others with better qualifications than you have already ruled out the language of the carvings as being what you'd like it to be. Bad science didn't change the academic perspective for the KRS and your dabbling with the ossuaries will likewise be just as fruitless.
Anonymous,
DeleteYour obsessive over-the-top negativity no longer merit responses. Don't waste anymore time with commentary like this because I'm done posting them. You should also offer an apology to Irene for the false accusations you made about her. If it appears to be sincere I will post it.
As I am of the mind that anyone here that takes you seriously is either a plant or an idiot, please express my apologies to Irene for assuming she was a plant.
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteThat you couldn't issue an apology to Irene without taking a shot at me shows a distinct lack of maturity. Before you press send the next time, pause, read what you wrote three times, and if it's something you'd put your name and reputation on, then press send.
Oh yeah; you're one of those people who don't put your name and reputation behind anything you say...
I'll let Irene decide if she wants to accept your apology.
“Anonymous September 3, 2015 at 7:46 AM
DeleteAs I am of the mind that anyone here that takes you seriously is either a plant or an idiot, please express my apologies to Irene for assuming she was a plant.”
So Mr/Ms Anonymous will apologize to me for calling me a plant but, based on the above, seems to think I’m an idiot.
Apology not accepted.
Irene
Very astute Irene. The irony is that Mr. Wolter only saw it as a slight against him. Rather telling, don't you think?
DeleteAnonymous,
DeleteDon't you have a job or life you have to attend to? Hovering over this blog and repeating the same old slurs is no way to go through life.
Move along...
Scott,
DeleteForget about Mr/Ms Anonymous, OK. He/she just isn’t worth it, and I’m sure you are aware of that.
I’ve become convinced that several of the posters to this blog who post as Anonymous, and never sign their names, are only here to cause trouble. They make a post that is inflammatory, and then expect a response and then keep posting the same sort of inflammatory rhetoric over and over again. They do not want to have a civil discussion with anyone, least of all you. They just want to attack you and your ideas and, occasionally, other posters. They want to spread discord on this blog, and if possible, intimidate and bully people to stop them from posting on this blog. After all, would you want to post on a blog that has this sort of juvenile sniping on it? While it’s up to you if you want to allow their posts to be posted, I’d ignore them, as I intend to in the future.
Irene
PS While I appreciate your trying to get this person to apologize to me, it wasn’t really necessary and all it did was give him/her a chance to do more sniping.
Irene,
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to say without getting a cursory look at the carvings to see what is there and then decide what to do to obtain age-dating information. It may boil down to cross-cutting relationships such as this came before this so it must be older, etc. It may come down to certain mineral growths on the carved surfaces and the relative amount of patina development. There may be datable organic material. We just don't know until we do a cursory examination.
The carvings themselves is where I think we can make some serious contributions. With the 3D digital microscope we can look very closely at the depths, widths, and profiles of the carvings. We can determine which lines came first, second and so on. This data together with the stylistic forms used we can likely say with reasonable certainty if the same person did certain carvings or not.
There is a lot more we plan to do and I'm sure plenty of unforeseen things will arise from the examinations that will likely shed new light on the ossuaries' inscriptions, the tomb, and the people interred inside it.
Scott,
DeleteSorry I didn’t get back to you before this, I was, shall we say, side tracked.
I imagine that with a 3D Digital Microscope you can some very detailed images with which to make an analysis of the carvings on the ossuaries. You’d probably be able to see the number of strokes it took to make each letter as well as the width of the chisels used. Please keep us informed here as to your progress of getting permission to study the ossuaries as well as the results.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteI will definitely report the findings of our studies if and when we are able to perform them.
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteWhile examining your pictures for the first time, a few nights ago, I noticed a striking similarity to another symbol I've seen. I started looking through boxes of books to find an example, and found a set of books, I've been searching years for. They show examples of Earth Mounds, which no longer exist. I'll email you some pictures, when I can pry my phone away from my wife. I believe the symbol I was looking for is called a "Celtic Wheel, or Cross". I don't recall which. The only difference was a circle around the "Hooked X"/Tau symbol, and a circle in the center, instead of lines coming to a point. As soon as I can find what I'm talking about, I'll send a picture.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
BTW- I misspoke on another thread. What I've always thought was an egg-shaped campus lake, turns out to be an equilateral triangle. I recently viewed some photos taken when the water was low. Makes the obelisk's shadow even more symbolic than I originally thought.
Anthony,
DeleteAs I thought when I read your mention of the Celtic Wheel or Cross, this symbol is much older than the Christian Church; it dates back to almost pre-history and is a very pagan symbol. Yes, the Irish still used it after they were converted to Christianity by adding elements of their new faith but the original design is far older. It is, in fact, used as a Neopaganism symbol today. In photographs of some of the more elaborate designs it looks more like a Templar Cross than anything else. I just don’t see the similarity between the symbol Scott found on the ossuary and a Celtic Cross. Of course, you could turn Hooked X into a Celtic Cross pretty much just by adding a circle to it, except the Celtic Cross doesn’t have a hook but the entire Hooked X and Tau Cross, no. A Celtic Cross is, at essence, a circle cut into four quadrants by the cross, which works for the Hooked X, but by adding the Tau Cross you have more than four quadrants so it doesn’t work. If you find any pictures that show anything else, please post them, or at least a link to them, I’d like to see them.
Irene
Hello Irene,
DeleteThe symbol I'm referring to looks like a wagon wheel. Although I haven't found a picture of the symbol, it's easy to make, while illustrating what I'm talking about at the same time. Pull up the symbol on your computer. Now, take a sheet of printer and lay it over the screen. Take a Sharpie and trace a circle around the "Hooked X"/Tau. Start at the bottom of the "Hook" and trace an interior circle. Now, starting from the inner-circle, trace the lines to the exterior circle. Be sure to leave the inner-circle free of any lines. Now, pull up the sheet of paper and you have the "Celtic Wheel" I've seen. I always found it strange that 7 lines could meet in the middle, if projected into the inner-circle, while the eighth only touched the inner-circle. A perfect way to conceal a symbol within a symbol. A mask of sorts. What's interesting...Take a look at the lines left out.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteI did what you suggested but, maybe because I’m a rotten artist, what I see is something like the Celtic Wheel of the Year, which is another pagan symbol. I don’t know if this is what you mean or not, but that’s what I see. While I suppose the Templars could have been familiar with this symbol, I’m not sure that 1st Century Christians would have been. And I’m not at all convinced that this is what the Templars would have intended to carve, assuming that they did carve this symbol in this ossuary. They were, after all, nominally Christian, and I don’t see them carving a long held pagan symbol into this ossuary. Carving a Hooked X with a Tau Cross, yes, carving a Pagan Wheel of the Year, no.
Symbols within symbols could have been used by any clandestine group, or more likely, symbols that have a duel meaning as only those in the know would understand the true intent of that symbol. The meaning of a symbol could change over time as well, so that what was carved, or drawn, in the past does not always have the same meaning to us now. Any symbol has to take into consideration the culture that it’s from; a symbol may have one meaning to us in the West and an entirely different one to someone from the East.
Actually, now that I think of it, the cross pollination of symbols, words and yes, even some celebrations between Paganism and the Christian Church is a discussion all by itself, for they are many and some quite surprising.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteYou've got it, or at least know what I'm talking about. I'd always taken this symbol as representing the 2 Solstices, 2 Equinoxes, and 4 Cross-quarter days. All of which, we still celebrate under different names. What we call "Groundhog Day" the Celts called Imbolc. Different disguise for the same underlying meaning. Astronomy symbols morph but, the basic underlying meaning doesn't change. The "Hooked X" predates the Templars, and Jesus by a few thousand years. I've seen several ancient Egyptian depictions. As well as other symbols which keep popping up. Remember, we're ultimately talking about symbolism used by the upper ranks of an Astronomer Priesthood. The "Celtic Wheel" and "Hooked X"/Tau could be connected.
From what I've learned, very little separates "Pagan" and Christianity. other than terminology, and place specific celestial observations. Jesus had 12 Apostles, Hercules had 12 Labors, and both represent the Sun and its apparent path through the 12 constellations of the Zodiac. Even the ritual of eating Jesus's flesh in the form of a circular white cracker, goes back to Ancient Egypt. Back then, it celebrated the Moon as Thoth. Christianity is but a melting pot of Astronomy, Geometry, Music, and Numbers. Personified Astronomy. After all, the three major religions all claim descent from the same man. Abraham, the Chaldean from Ur. The Chaldeans were Astronomers, and treated comets the same as planets, only with longer orbits.
Anthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteYou have me confused. Are you trying to imply that Abraham/Chaldeans spread his knowledge of Astronomy throughout the ancient world? And that’s why there are many similarities between many of the world’s religions. I might agree that the Middle Eastern religions could have been influenced by Abraham/Chaldeans because of their geographic proximity to Ur, but not with Celtic Paganism as the Celts originated in Central Europe, probably in Austria.
Look at it this way, before there was, what we call, ‘civilization’ there was a time when early man transitioned from hunter-gathers to an agricultural society. Early man learned about cultivating crops, they domesticated animals and built permanent settlements. Of primary importance would have been knowing when to plant crops, when to reap those crops and when to do other necessary chores in an agricultural society. Hence the development of the Wheel of the Year, Celtic or otherwise, because at essence the Wheel of the Year represents an agricultural calendar. Yes, a princely and priestly class would have developed and they would have been the ones to observe the changing of the seasons and stars in order to create this calendar, but these people would have 100s if not 1000s of years to make those observations then passing those observations on to their descendants who added observations of their own. In other words, the Wheel of the Year wasn’t created overnight, but rather was developed over an extended period of time, nor would it have required any outside influence to do it. I admit this is somewhat of an oversimplification of what happened but I think it makes my point.
I agree that there are many Pagan influences on Christianity but how many of those were happenstance and how many were by design. Did the early Church Fathers make a decision to add some of these Pagan celebrations to the Church Calendar, or did the people they converted just keep doing what was familiar to them and the Church allowed them to do so. I’m not sure we’ll ever really answer that, but I happen to think it was a little of each. For example, the Christian Holiday of Easter to keyed to the Jewish Holiday of Passover but around the same time the Pagans had the festival of Ostara, which many people believe gave us the name for Easter as well as eggs as the symbol for it. I could go on, but as I’ve said before this could be a very long discussion if I did.
You also compared Jesus and Hercules but how about Arthur of Briton? He did have an unusual birth and a secretive upbringing, his Knights of the Round Table could be viewed as his disciples and, according to legend, he didn’t die but rather was taken to the Isle of Avalon from which one day he will return.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteThere are so many similarities between the world's religions because they are all based upon astronomy. The 4 Pillars of Horus, 4 horns on the Jewish altar, 4 gospels, and the 4-headed beast of Ezekiel are all reference to the 4 fixed signs of the zodiac. In my opinion, you are correct. Hercules, Jesus, and King Arthur are all personifications of the Sun. I'd already mentioned this on another thread, and was trying to avoid repeating myself. Instead of "Easter Sunday"...think of it as "Ishtar Sunday".
I'm by far not the first to suggest a connection between Northern European Astronomer Priests and their various counterparts from other cultures. In their book, "Uriel's Machine" C. Knight, and R. Lomas make a convincing argument for the biblical Enoch being taken on a tour of megalithic sites of Northern Europe. Are you familiar with "Cherchen Man" and "Cherchen Woman"? Their tools, attire, and where they were found might surprise you.
From what I can tell, mankind learned everything from studying the stars. None of what you've mentioned would be possible without a strong astronomical foundation. Real power would come with eclipse prediction.
Anthony
Anthony,
DeleteYou are definitely onto something with the ancients' knowledge and power being based in the heavens. The most important of the "Ancient Mysteries", which were nothing more than the seven classic arts and sciences, was astronomy.
Anthony,
Delete<>
No, I wasn’t familiar the Cherchen Man or Woman until now but it doesn’t really surprise me if Celts ended up in, what we now call, China. What we do know about the early Celts is that they originated in Central Europe and from there migrated to many parts of Western Europe and as far east as the Ukraine and Turkey, it isn’t that much of a stretch that to think that one tribe of them ended up in China. But this happened between three and four thousand years ago, what I was postulating happened much earlier than that.
Not an argument that man’s knowledge of Astronomy was essential to the development of civilization. In order to create a ‘civilization’ you first have to develop an agricultural based society, one that could grow its own crops and have domesticated livestock, and in order to do that you needed to know when the seasons would change, which you could do by watching the stars. But all of that would have been observable by anyone in any location, and these observations could have occurred over quite a number of years, maybe thousands of years.
Call me a bit of a skeptic, but I’m not convinced that one group of people developed this and then spread their knowledge throughout known world. Any number of groups of people could have made the same observations and came to the same conclusions, even if they did so at different times in history. Could one group have discovered Astronomy first and taught that science to a neighboring group who taught it to another neighboring group and so forth so that the knowledge of the stars spread that way? Sure, but proving that is going to be almost impossible.
Irene
Anthony
Delete<< In my opinion, you are correct. Hercules, Jesus, and King Arthur are all personifications of the Sun. I'd already mentioned this on another thread, and was trying to avoid repeating myself.>>
I don’t remember reading anything about this so it would have been new to me.
In any case, the study of King Arthur is an absolutely fascinating one for we can see the development from the historical Arthur to the legendary Arthur. Arthur was a real person, or as one school of thought believes, several people who, in time, were conflated into one person. From there, by studying the literature, we can see what has been added to the historical record in order to transform it into the myth. None of which is in conflict with your thesis because much of what was added to create the Arthurian Legend was pagan in origin. The Quest for the Holy Grail, for example, was basically Celtic Questing legends with the Grail, a Christian symbol, being substituted for a pagan symbol. And in an increasingly Christianized Britain this would have been necessary in order to preserve the stories and legends. As the saying goes, “History becomes legend and legend becomes myth” and with the Arthurian Legend we can see Arthur the man become Arthur the myth.
All of which makes me wonder about other mythologies out there today.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteFrom what I understand, Cherchen Man and Woman predate the people we call "Celts". I find it interesting, you mentioned Turkey. I've come to believe most of the modern world began in Turkey, or was reborn in Turkey. This is due to the large number of underground cities, and other ideas I'm uncomfortable sharing at this point.
Arthur may, or may not have been an actual historical figure but, he's most definitely assumed the personification of the star we orbit. Arthur, Hercules, Jesus, Hiram Abiff, and a whole host of other characters are merely personifications of the Sun. Even Noah...Gathering the animals 2x2...The sun and 24 ancient constellations of the Northern Hemisphere. There are still people looking for a boat, instead of to the stars.
Anthony Warren
Just saw the announcement for your new show airing this month, Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar. Was Barry Clifford involved with this? The same Barry Clifford who is the subject matter of this UNESCO report?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/Rapport_Madagascar_EN_public.pdf
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYes, and this report is a very bias and shoddy presentation of a 4-day investigation into multiple shipwrecks in what they readily admit were very poor visibility conditions. A proper underwater archaeological investigation into a single shipwreck takes many weeks under good visibility conditions.
UNESCO hates Barry Clifford simply because he is the most successful pirate ship discoverer in history. A few months ago they displayed what I consider inexcusable unprofessionalism when they issued a press release filled negative statements about Clifford personally and about his underwater work a month-and-a-half before UNESCO set foot in Madagascar.
To be blunt, this is nothing more than personally-driven, negative propaganda on par with another well-known entity that does bias and shoddy work: Wikipedia.
Scott, that response of yours really doesn't answer the concerns raised. You attack the messenger so to speak. That you feel their analysis is guided by "hate", rather than dispute it with verifiable facts does little to counter UNESCO's assertions that Clifford's conclusions were far off base.
ReplyDeleteYou often ask for facts. When those don't support you, you make personal attacks. Isn't this the sort of behavior you abhor?
Anonymous,
DeleteDid you not read the first and second paragraphs? Those are factual statements that support my conclusion. Come on man; you're criticism is like a broken record.
Hi Mr. Wolter. I read this at the History site, about your upcoming program. "Lost treasure is the foundation of legends and lore, and the greatest lost treasure of all belonged to the Knights Templar." I am a big believer in lost Templar treasure, since they had to divest themselves of a huge amount of accumulated wealth, and probably quite fast. Any way you look at it, they may have wanted to take part of the treasure and hide it at the farthest known point of exploration, like in N. America. Maybe the Knights Templar knew more about medieval Norse mapping than the Catholic Church did just before their fall. Thank you for being willing to share your thoughts about all this. - Peyton
ReplyDeletePeyton,
ReplyDeleteI don't want to say too much before the shows air, but let's just say the Templars, or as I like to call these people the "Venus Families", were not stupid and didn't leave all their treasure in one place and they kept it moving.
I hope you enjoy the shows!
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteCan you answer the concerns of Professor Craig Evans as expressed within his article? It would seem once again the linguists have you trumped:
http://craigaevans.com/tombofjesus.htm
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteFirst, I don't have to answer Professor Craig's concerns because they have already been answered by numerous other biblical scholars. Second, like you, he is bias against the tomb and simply throws out objections without citing sources and his objectivity is questionable since he is from a "Divinity College." Third, this article is clearly outdated as he refers the "James" ossuary as having "uncertain provenance" which is no longer the case today. Science has definitively proven it is the tenth missing ossuary from the Talpiot Tomb.
I suggest you read the work of James Tabor, a Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, where he has taught since 1989 and served as Chair from 2004-2014, and get up to date on the latest research regarding the tomb. James was against the tomb being connected to the biblical Jesus at first, but was later convinced by the evidence and subsequent research that it is.
Tabor is also unbiased in this arena whereas Professor Evans is not.
Hi Scott,
ReplyDeleteHow come in the History Channel's description for the new series on their site, does it say that your a "historian" and not a "geologist"?
http://www.history.com/shows/pirate-treasure-of-the-knights-templar/about
-- John
John,
ReplyDeleteThat's a good question. However, there are certain aspects of medieval history I do know a lot about. I certainly wouldn't try to pass myself off as an academic in history, but I have published a lot of original historical research. 'Amateur historian' is probably accurate.
I'll let you decide when you watch the new series.
Scott,
ReplyDeleteI understand that reading up on medieval history is a hobby and side project of yours, but it still does seem like History Channel should fix the description as it is passing you off as someone that you are not. Has anybody contacted them to inform them of it? It would just feel more honest if it was updated.
-- John
John,
ReplyDeleteMedieval history is more than just a hobby or side project to me and I don't think History is trying to pass me off as someone I'm not. What in your definition qualifies someone to be an historian?
What you will learn in this series very few historians know anything about.
Scott,
ReplyDeleteI don't have my own definition of history as it is not mine to call. A historian is a professional and an authority who studies the past, and is accredited with a degree in the field because of their extensive focus in it. Even you said Scott that it is more accurate to say that you are an "amateur historian," so you are aware that you are not a professional in the field since you don't have a degree. And History hasn't described you before as a historian, so it's weird now that they are doing it all of a sudden.
-- John
John,
DeleteHaving a degree in history makes you an "historian" or a "scholar of History" or a "Professor of History", but that doesn't guarantee competence as we've seen time and again in the arena of pre-Columbian history in North America. Being paid makes you a "professional" and simply knowing more than most about a particular subject makes a person an "authority." An academic degree isn't required for either title.
Let's be clear that I'm not claiming to be an academic historian, but in this particular subject matter that is germane to this show I do know a lot about it.
I was surprised to see that title for me listed too, but it's too late to change. For the record; I am and always will be a forensic geologist who knows a lot about certain aspects of history.
Scott,
DeleteMalcolm Barber is claimed to be a "Templar Historian" as well. Here are his credentials (from Wikipedia, unfortunately):
"Biography
Born in 1943, Barber attended Walpole Grammar School in Ealing from 1954–1961, followed by the University of Nottingham from 1961–1966, where he received his Bachelor's degree in 1964. He attended the British School at Rome from 1965–1966, and received his PhD in 1968 from the University of Nottingham.
Barber was a Professor of Medieval European History in the Faculty of Arts and Humanities at the University of Reading in the UK, until his retirement in September 2004.
Positions
Director of the Graduate Centre for Medieval Studies at Reading, 1986–1989
British Academy Research Readership, 1989–1991
Leverhulme Research Fellowship, 1997–1998
Senior Fellowship, National Humanities Center, North Carolina, 1998–1999
Journal editor
(with P. Noble and J. Norton-Smith), Reading Medieval Studies, 1977–1985
Annual Bulletin of the Society for the Study of the Crusade and the Latin East, 1986–1990
The Journal of Medieval History, 1996–2002
Works
The Trial of the Templars, Cambridge University Press. 1st edition, 1978. 2nd edition, 2006
The Two Cities. Medieval Europe 1050-1320. Routledge. 1st edition, 1992. 2nd edition, 2004
The New Knighthood. A History of the Order of the Temple. Cambridge University Press, 1994
Crusaders and Heretics, Twelfth to Fourteenth Centuries. Collected Studies. Aldershot, 1995
The Cathars. Dualist Heretics in Languedoc in the High Middle Ages. Longman, 2000
The Crusader States. Yale University Press, 2012
Edited
The Military Orders. Fighting for the Faith and Caring for the Sick. Variorum, 1994
(with K. Bate), The Templars, Manchester University Press, 2002
(with M. Ailes), The History of the Holy War. Ambroise's Estoire de la Guerre Sainte, 2 volumes. The Boydell Press, 2003."
Can you please post your qualifications in comparison? I think it would go a long way in answering John's concerns.
Cheers!
~Lesley
Lesley,
DeleteWe're happy for Mr. Barber and his credentials. However, I highly doubt he knows much if anything about the Templar's connection to the Kensington Rune Stone, the Hooked X, or the historical subject matter of my last three books.
In any case, I also don't feel a need to try and satisfy any of John's concerns. My advice is to sit back, and enjoy the shows, and hopefully he and others watching will learn something.
Yes. You will rewrite true history with what professors ignore. I cannot wait for the treasure to be found!
DeleteNam E'tisoppo
Scott, How closely did you work with Barry Clifford's historian? Ken Kinkor did any of his research lead you to your discovery?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteI have never met Ken Kinkor?
How long have you been working with Barry?
ReplyDeleteIn response to the above, I found this quote from Mike Brass' www.antiquityofman.com site most apropos :
ReplyDelete"Academic journals demand a tight structure and writing style for a reason, and the slowish turn-around (due to the sheer volume of submissions received) which some of them suffer from is an indication of the esteem in which they are held by the academic communinity. New findings need to be reviewed in the proper forum and by scientific peers; this requires that the reports be published in a peer-reviewed journal. It is very noticeable that fringe authors traditionally make no effort to get their ideas published in the appropriate forum where they can be evaluated on a level playing field. Their excuses of by-passing the academic community and appealing directly to the general public who, with all due respect, sometimes do not possses the required skill and knowledge to separate fact from cleverly presented fiction, hold no water."
Anonymous,
DeleteWhile this flowery prose sounds wonderful, we know in reality this is not how the academic peer review process really works. The evidence in the numerous erroneous conclusions they've published thus creating the historical mess professional people are now trying to clean up.
I find it interesting that certain academics and debunkers feel the need to label those who dare to question them "fringe." It's the age-old technique of diminishing or dehumanizing people to justify their subsequent persecution. It's really no different than calling Native Americans "savages", or a woman a "whore", or an African American the "N-word." I've been called a "liar", "dangerous", "unqualified", and a "racist" by skeptics and debunkers so they feel empowered to attack me personally when they cannot address the facts.
This is the very technique Mr. Anonymous uses to try and criticize me and my work. "Anonymous" has submitted about 50 inappropriate posts aimed at me and other posters, such as Irene earlier in this thread, that I have not posted for obvious reasons. I only post an occasional submission when he is able to write something that approaches being productive and appropriate.
Haven't you figured it out when you sink to that level you've already lost?
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI've only met Barry twice while filming over the course of the past six months.
Scott! I just finished watching " Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar " and when you spoke about the markings underground of " AVM " Ave Virgo Maria, I noticed that the Mason symbol creates the " AVM " initials as well !!! If you already realized this and spoke or wrote about it, I apologize for my ignorance. When I made this realization, of course, I got chills.
ReplyDeleteScott, is the Skull & Cross Bone a common symbol on Mason Items? Also I love all your shows.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI don't think that's a coincidence do you? ;-)
Hey Scott, I was watching Pawn Stars today and a Mason came in who had a Mason kit, thats what they called it which he said was owned by a J.T. Long he died in 1890 His name was hand stiched on it. What caught my eye was the skull and crossbone that was on it. I'm not sure if it's important to you however, I always watch your shows and was waiting to watch Pirate Treasure of the Knights Templar and after watching it I thought you might be interested in knowing about it. I have no idea if a skull and crossbone is a common symbol on Mason Items but it was shown on this one.
ReplyDeleteThe man was looking to sell it however he did not. They never gave his name but he could belong to the local chapter or perhaps Rick the owner of Pawn Stars remembers him and could assist you if you feel you want more info.
Shelley,
DeleteThe skull and crossbones is a relatively common symbol within Freemasonry and Templarism. It's a symbol of death and meant to remind one of their own mortality. It has other symbolic meanings as well. While I appreciate your passing along this tip, I already have older Masonic articles the feature the skull and crossbones.
Thank you for thinking of me!
Scott, Have you ever read Claude Levi Strauss before?
ReplyDeleteWhat I see from you (and the History Channel in general) is that you clearly have not read anthropological concepts. You've elected to either discard or throw away a body of work from people that spent their entire lives in the training of anthropology.
Levi Strauss started from the same basic point of view that you would have. He saw that cultures around the world share similiar symbols and myths through an enormous time depth. He spent a large part of his life compiling reams and reams of these myths from tribal groups all over the world. What he found is that their was a universality to symbols and myths that had similiar phonetic structures he termed binary opposites. Strauss believed that these structures were inherent in the human mind just as syntax and grammar are not shared by one specific group. Was he right or wrong? I dunno, but at least he used empirical methods to prove out certain tenets of his theories. What you do is look at worldly symbols and try to connect the dots through wild theories based on a fundamental lack of understanding in the most basic anthropological, biological, and psychological basis. This is unfortunate in my opinion because all it takes is some back ground reading and with your passion I would expect that you could do it and see the errors of your way.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting topic and at some point we might look into it. However, I can assure you we haven't willfully ignored any topic and it's awfully presumptuous to make such a claim. I also don't agree with your characterization of my work as "wild theories". Besides the fact you clearly don't appreciate my point of view on much of anything it's obvious you have an awfully strong opinion about yourself.
"Figure 8. The Hooked X symbol occurs twenty-two times on the Kensington Rune Stone; it is used for the “a” sound within the Old Swedish runic inscription discovered in Minnesota in 1898. This example is found in the second word on line 6. (Wolter, 2002)"
ReplyDeleteThe hooked X does indeed distinguish it from a Latin X for an "a" sound, but was found within the Larsson Papers, which were fairly modern runes that tradesmen used in the time of Olof Ohman; the discoverer of the Kensington Rune Stone, who would have had access to these modern runes. The smoking gun so to speak, for this hoax.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThis is classic “debunker” mentality from someone whose mind is already made up and failed to see the obvious. Before the papers came to light, I said the previously unseen KRS symbols were connected to the medieval Cistercians and Knights Templar monastic orders and subsequently their ideological brethren within modern Freemasonry. The Larsson Papers have proved I was right, yet frantic scholars like Henrik Williams, who were afraid of having to admit they were wrong about the KRS crafted factually unsupported speculation it was the source Ohman used to craft the inscription. What proof do you have that Ohman or anyone else in America at that time had access to the Larsson Papers? Even if they did, you still couldn’t come close to carving the KRS inscription. Are you going to accept these facts or continue to avoid the them?
The second Larsson Papers runic alphabet that includes SOME of the symbols that fooled the scholars for over a century were part of what the document itself says, "Last of these types of letters the Secret Style is introduced, which is said to be the first in the World and was written on the Law Tablets." (Williams, 2004) Any knowledgeable Freemason will know this is a secret coded alphabet that goes back at least many hundreds of years.
Of course, modern academics like Williams haven't a clue about the codes and ciphers used in ancient or modern Freemasonry. Instead of reaching out to those who might have helped him understand the Masonic aspects of the papers, he took the easy way out and claimed Ohman, who was not a Freemason, somehow had used them.
This is irresponsible behavior by Williams and his Swedish colleagues and unfortunate for people like you to have believed in them. It’s time the Swedish academics admitted they have handled this poorly and misled unsuspecting followers like yourself.
"What proof do you have that Ohman or anyone else in America at that time had access to the Larsson Papers?"
ReplyDeleteOccam's Razor. It is more likely that Swedish immigrants in the late 19th century had access to the coded runes of the Larsson papers used by tradesmen from which the carvings on the KRS mimic; more so than tenuous connections to alleged Freemason coding of which you have no proof.
What is being ignored in this discussion is the physical evidence concerning The Kensington Rune Stone. What we know about its discovery is that Olof Ohman felled a tree on his farm in 1898 and found the stone wrapped in the tree roots. That tree was believed to be about 20 to 30 years old. Olof Ohman only immigrated to this country about 19 years before and was only on that farm for about 6 years before he found the stone. A number of years later marks were found on the stone that are consistent with its being wrapped for an extended period of time in roots, thereby corroborating Olof Ohman’s story of the discovery of the stone.
DeleteNow tell me how Mr. Ohman could have possibly buried that stone, on a farm that he didn’t own yet, years before he even entered this county. It ought to be an interesting story.
Now let’s talk about the weathering of the stone. Mr. Wolter conducted a study in 2003 and concluded that the carving on the stone was over 200 years old at that time. This means that the stone would have been carved no later than about 1800 or about 100 years before Mr. Ohman found it. (Scott, am I correct about this, it was, after all, your study?) Again, how could Mr. Ohman have carved the stone when it was apparently carved before he was born?
In my opinion, your thesis that somehow Olof Ohman had access to the Larsson Papers just doesn’t hold up. If the symbols contained in the Larsson Papers were that wildly known that they were in use by tradesman and farmers then it would stand to reason that the Linguistic Authorities at the time should have known about them, but it seems that they didn’t. You just can’t on the one hand claim that a farmer, like Mr. Ohman, knew about these symbols but on the other scholars didn’t.
You also can’t take only one aspect of something like this and claim it’s a fraud. You have to look at the entire picture. Where was it found, under what conditions, what physical evidence is there concerning its discovery and is all of that consistent? Argue all you want about the contents, but it sure doesn’t look like Olof Ohman perpetrated a hoax in my opinion. And if he didn’t, the question becomes who did, or is the Kensington Rune Stone real.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteYou have things down pretty well. However, there were 12 first-hand witnesses who saw the tree, the stone and the roots within a day of the discovery. Keep in mind Olof's two oldest sons, Olof Jr. and Edward, were present at the moment of discovery and both wrote statements to those facts.
Actually, my weathering study pushes the timeline back 200 years from 1898, to at least the end of the seventeenth century because the KRS hasn't been in a weathering environment since it was discovered. Of course the language, runes, dialect, grammar and dating are consistent with the middle of the 14th century. Since it's not a hoax, simple logic demands it can only be a genuine artifact.
Olof Ohman was incapable of carving the KRS inscription, had no motive to such a thing, and repeatedly denied it throughout his life. Of course, none of this matters to Mr. Anonymous and his friends because they have no interest in the truth. Debunker are simply trying to preserve the sacred academic paradigm of certain soft science scholars and their "beliefs."
Clearly this is driven by fear and I don't understand why. This should be exciting to scholars who have had a new door to history opened creating amazing opportunities to learn. Oh that's right, they already know it all...
Scott,
DeleteI did know about Mr. Ohman’s sons being there and that there were a number of other witnesses who saw the stone wrapped in the tree roots shortly after it was found. I just wanted to keep it simple for Mr. Anonymous, who seems to have a one track mind and a simple one at that.
I admit I was a bit confused about the dates. I’ve heard the figure to be 200 years; I assumed that it was 200 years before you inspected the stone, not 200 years before it was found. I’m glad you cleared that up for me.
It’s high time that Olof Ohman was cleared of the charge of faking KRS, it’s pretty clear that he didn’t for so many reasons. And those that won’t clear him of any wrong doing are the same people that won’t even consider that the KRS isn’t a hoax. For if he didn’t fake it, and it’s still a fake, who did? If the answer is that no one could have, then it might actually be real, and they won’t admit that.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteYou are 100% right that the Governor of Minnesota, and eventually the President of the United States, should issue a public apology to the Ohman Family. I’ve suggested this many times over the years; even Professor Henrik Williams has stated that Olof Ohman couldn’t have created the inscription and I actually witnessed him formally apologize to the Olof's grandson.
As for Mr. Anonymous, of course he won’t admit it’s genuine because he’s incapable of being honest or objective in his argumentation. He’s one of those people whose more concerned with “being right," than getting the right answer.
Mr. Wolter incorrectly believes that the light lines on the KRS were caused by mycorrhiza coming from the tree roots excreting iron on the stone over time. This is simply not plausible. The iron, if any, would come from the root tips which would not remain stationary for such an extended period underground, nor leave such wide and compact markings. No, the staining was from contact with water over a very long time from wherever this stone came from orginally. Both the science and the facts go against him here.
Delete.
Anonymous,
DeleteWhy do you insist on pretending you don't understand what I've published and written multiple times on this blog about the KRS tree roots? I don't "believe" anything, I know the white undulating and branching lineations on the back side of the stone were produced by prolonged contact with live roots. This was confirmed by plant physiologist Dr. Paul Syltie.
No competent geologist would ever suggest they were caused by flowing water; it's an absurd idea. Further, why would we take seriously any suggestions from a nameless person on this blog with no credentials? Before trying to attack my work from the shadows, identify yourself and bring some meat to the table or please stop wasting our time.
Mr. Anonymous unfortunately is correct, my good man. Numerous studies exist in regard to root growth, soil composition and mineral blockage. I'm afraid if the roots did react with the greywacke over time, there wouldn't be staining, but rather trenching instead.
DeleteCheers,
Lesley
Lesley,
DeleteSorry, but Anonymous is not correct and neither are you. If you would refer to the geological section of my “Compelling New Evidence” book there are photographs of the root leaching including a cut and polished cross-section of the core sample taken through the root leaching. What is clear and obvious is the iron and magnesium ‘pigment’ of the mafic minerals has been chemically leached out by acids formed by the roots leaving the minerals white. There has been no “mineral blockage” or “trenching” (whatever that is). Further, there isn’t any “staining” either as the root leaching process remove elements from the minerals, it doesn’t leave anything.
Your information is flat-out incorrect, I would try again.
Forgive my vernacular, but mineral blockage would be a slab of stone beneath my garden. Trenching over rock however, shouldn't be a term foreign to you considering your research. As previously referred, there are numerous and active studies in regard to tree roots and their interaction with rock slabs, as weathering dating is an evolving field. But you know this, of course.
DeleteCheers,
Lesley
Lesley,
DeleteYou are correct that relative-age, and specific-age dating of manmade surfaces in rock is an evolving science, but there are tried and true methods and root leaching is one of them. Regardless, in the case of Mr. Anonymous, he really isn't seeking truth or trying to be balanced in his argumentation, he is simply being a troll and I will not allow that intentional negativity and deception to run amok on this blog.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteWhen left with no evidence to refute the facts in front of you, the last resort is to desperately throw out Occam's Razor? You refuse to accept the geological science, the ever mounting historical evidence, the language, runes, dialect, and grammar have all been solved and now you have nothing left.
"Tenuous connections to the alleged Freemasons?" Nobody denies the Larsson papers aren't Masonic in origin buddy. Face it; you've lost pal. By continuing to argue a lost cause shows a lack of honesty and integrity. Your incessant argumentation in the face of a hopeless situation indicates this not about the Kensington Rune Stone or any of the other historical question discussed on this blog. The facts indicate this is a personal crusade you are on against me and what I represent.
It's time for you to run along and go play someone else's sandbox.
Join us in the ultimate quest. Firstly, the original Sanskrit Torah must be located and recovered. Secondly, let us use the high technology of the Sanskrit Torah (the same high technology that I used to reincarnate from Soma to Earth) to reincarnate repeatedly and live forever on our paradise of Earth that we must maintain so that we all will have a paradise to live upon.
ReplyDeleteGreetings from Soma to planet Earth. I am an extraterrestrial human being. My people are the Ailavansha. I am from Soma. The Torah was originally written in Sanskrit and it is about the Ailavansha.
To translate from Hebrew into Sanskrit (the original language of the Torah) the vowels must be reattached to the base letters.
For example, the word for "God" in Genesis comes from the Hebrew word "ALHJM" which is mistranslated from Sanskrit. To translate from Hebrew back into Sanskrit then the vowels must be reattached to the base letters so "AL" may become "AiLa," "H" may become a silent "ḥ," and "JM" may become "JāMi" forming the word "AiLa ḥ JāMi" from "AL H JM."
JāMi means "related" and AiLa means the Ailas also called the Ailavansha or the Lunar Dynasty.
Similarly, the word for "Heaven" from Genesis is "SMJM" in Hebrew and when translated back into Sanskrit it may become "SoMa" plus "JāMi." "Soma" is the Sanskrit word for the "Moon."
Genesis may actually be speaking of the Lunar Dynasty coming from the Moon to the Earth. Genesis has nothing to do with "God" creating "Heaven" and Earth. The word for "God" is a mistranslation of the Sanskrit words for the "Lunar Dynasty" and the word for Heaven is a mistranslation of the Sanskrit word for the "Moon."
David,
DeleteI'm not sure how to respond to this? Never met an extraterrestrial before and I'm not sure I've met one now...
Regarding the wagon wheel symbol, is there any chance it could also be a Native American symbol? It looks very familiar. Could the Templars have also shared their symbols upon coming to America?
ReplyDeleteJan,
DeleteI'm not sure which wagon wheel you're referring to? The is absolutely no doubt the Templar's shared symbols and their blood through intermarriages with Native Americans during their many trips to North America both before and after the putdown in 1307.
There's a huge story there that has never been explored before.
I have seen a Hopi symbol and other Native American symbols with a cross and X incorporated. The wagon wheel symbol as well enclosed in a circle to signify a permanent home. Also saw a West African symbol like it signifying wisdom as well as a Buddhist symbol used for burial. I am intrigued by the possibility that it could all be related to the Templars as well to the life of Christ. It is said that Christ travelled to India, China and perhaps Egypt.He both shared and gleaned much wisdom and I do think the symbol on the ossuary could also symbolize he was a man of wisdom. Maybe you could do a program about the connection between the Templars and the Native Americans and their shared symbology. There is definitely history there. Thank you for the work you do in opening eyes and minds.
DeleteJan,
DeleteThe Native American wheels you are referring to are astronomical observatories. I suspect the other wheels you mention are used for astronomical purposes as well. I have no doubt during his initiation into the ancient mysteries that Jesus learned all about astronomy. Some say he learned about the interaction of the heavenly bodies from Tibetan monks in the greatest observatory in the world; the Himalayan Mountains.
Scott,
DeleteI think like myself some of your critics are more frustrated with the unsubstantiated larger scale narrative that you seem to include with all of your claims. I am no expert in the KRS and when looking at the work you and others have done I can see why you believe that it is authentic. However I can also see that additional work needs to be done and that it can still be viewed as an anomaly. But the biggest issue I and others have are statements like you made above “The is absolutely no doubt the Templar's shared symbols and their blood through intermarriages with Native Americans during their many trips to North America both before and after the putdown in 1307.” At this point there is no evidence of any large scale colonization by any Templar group or any other European group prior to Columbus. Besides the Templars you have also suggested on your TV show that other groups (Phoenicians, Egyptians and more) have made trips to the western continents. But again there is no physical evidence of any long time colonization. In fact we do not see non direct physical evidence you would expect from long term visits and trading between North America and the rest of the world. By that I mean you do not see the trade of food goods of plants and animals or trade in technology and weapons. These type of trades would not necessarily occur if it was a small group had a one way trip to North America and eventually disappeared. But in your claim any large group that was traveling back and forth would have to reload their ship for a return trip and could only restock with local foods to make the long trip back. However we do not see any food goods from North America appear into Europe until after Columbus. Some of the most commonly currently used foods in Europe (corn, potatoes, tomatoes, chocolate) did not get there until after Columbus. So even if the KRS is authentic wouldn't the most logical explanation be exactly what is inscribed on the stone. That a small group of explorers where in MN but lost half there group died in that location? Compared to your continued statement of continued voyages back and forth.
Joe
"So even if the KRS is authentic wouldn't the most logical explanation be exactly what is inscribed on the stone."
DeleteIf that were the case Joe, then we'd be looking for the island from where it came from; had it not been dismissed as the hoax it always has been from the get go.
Anonymous,
DeletePlease stop with the religious "hoax" dogma it's as annoying as it is wrong.
With regard to the "island" comment, no you cannot necessarily take the everything within the inscription at apparent face value. The Old Swedish word for island could mean any one of the following, a piece of land surrounding by water, a peninsular, or a hill.
This is why I always advise caution when people try to interpret the inscription literally. However, there is no misunderstanding of the phrase that means "acquisition business, or taking up land."
The Kensington Rune Stone is medieval land claim and all the empty, unsupported declarations to the contrary won't change the facts that support that. Are you paying close attention Anonymous?
Joe,
DeleteYou have a lot here, let’s try and unpack a few things, shall we?
First of all, before you can do any investigations about the KRH you have to accept the fact that it could be real and not a hoax, academia just doesn’t want to do that. To them, why should they look for evidence that can corroborate KRS when it’s a fake and they won’t find anything. See the Catch 22 here. Personally, I believe that it could be real, or at least that Olof Ohman couldn’t have carved it. Let’s go from there, shall we.
If Mr. Ohman didn’t carve it and there was no one in the area that could have carved it in the late 1600s, as per Scott’s weathering study, then who did. Academia at the time of KRS’s discovery called it hoax because of, among other things, some unknown runes that were used on the stone. Those runes have now been discovered to have been used by certain groups in the 1300s, so let’s assume that it real. OK, now where does that leave us?
We have a group of explorers who are familiar with Scandinavian runes that were used by a group that has some association with the Templers. They come to North America and leave a land claim in the form of a rune stone and then leave. But where did they go to? Did they return to Europe or to a much larger base on the North American Continent? We just don’t know and no one is really looking because of the old Catch 22, why look for something you are not going to find. See how it goes.
To be honest, we really don’t know how large a group the Templers, or anyone else, actually sent over here. They may not have done it on a large scale; they may have only sent smaller groups in order to explore this new world they found and to establish ties to the natives. They may have wanted to wait until later before they sent a larger group to actually set up a colony but were unable to do so.
They also, at this time at least, may have not wanted to establish any trade with the Europeans as they wanted a safe haven, and a secret one at that. They had a different purpose then Columbus so they would have acted differently. But you do know that there is, what some people believe, ears of corn carved into Roswell Chapel along with a flower that wasn’t known in Europe at the time, but is native to the United States? There are several anomalies such as this around Europe, and all of them I believe are located in places that have something to do with the Templers.
What we have is a circular argument, you claim that there is no corroboration for the authenticity of KRS but if you can’t admit the possibility that it could be real, why bother looking for that evidence. And if anyone claims that it is real, you ask for corroboration, which won’t happen because no one is looking for it. It’s become an endless cycle.
Irene
Irene/Joe,
DeleteYou've summed up the conundrum for the skeptics quite well Irene. They reached an erroneous premature conclusion within months of the stone’s discovery and that is when everything stopped. I still find it borderline incredible that a lowly geologist like me was able to travel to Sweden, albeit with five trips, to find the mysterious runes the Scandinavian scholars said never existed right in their own backyard. Granted I was working with then clearheaded linguists Dick Nielsen and Henrik Williams who pointed me in the right directions. This is a perfect example of your point Irene and one I’ve echoed many times. You’ll never find anything sitting your chair crying, “it’s a hoax.”
From a forensic investigation standpoint, the KRS is a layup. Voluminous evidence from multiple disciplines is only consistent with authenticity. That means there has to be an explanation for what happened to that group of 30 men in the KRS party. I think Irene explained it logically and clearly. There was no mass influx of Europeans to pre-Columbian North America with the intent of bringing agricultural advances back to Europe. In fact, it would have been the last thing the Templar parties who came here would have done. These were covert missions that were carried out with utmost secrecy.
That’s’ the problem with Joe's thesis, he's operating on assumptions that simply don't apply in this situation. It's not a criticism, it's a fact.
You also bring up the another important point Irene, and that is the relationship the Templar's had with various Native American tribes. They shared a similar ideology and could only be successful, and maintain secrecy, through intermarriage and assimilation. There's simply no way the Templar's could have made it to what is now Minnesota without the Natives allowing them to.
It's time for academia and the skeptics to get on board and start being part of the solution instead of continuing to ride the going-nowhere "hoax" merry-go-round.
Scott
DeleteThe trouble with Joe, and others like him, is that they are trying to superimpose Columbus’s motivations on to the Templers, and as we know, they had entirely different agendas. Columbus wanted to build colonies in order to exploit the New World to benefit the Old. The Templers wanted to create a secret safe haven for themselves and their followers. Columbus operated in an open manner, the Templers didn’t, they operated in a covert and clandestine one.
The Templers would have sent small groups over here in order to explore this new land and create ties with the Native Tribes in order to make that exploration easier. There is no way that any group could have gotten more than a couple of miles inland without the cooperation of those Native American Tribes. Intermarriage and adoption into the tribe could have been one part of building alliances with those tribes but I doubt that that was the only thing the Templers had in mind.
The Templers supposedly had a great treasure, and what better place to hid it from the Old World then in the New World. That treasure did not just have to be gold, silver and gems, it could have also been art work, relics and scrolls, such as the Templer Archives, which has never been found, and those relics and scrolls could have been more important to the Templers then the precious metals and gems. And that would have been another reason to have had covert and clandestine voyages to the New World.
No, the Templers operated in secret, at least initially, and while they may have had a long term plan to colonize North America they never got a chance to execute it, probably because of the Plague that ravaged Europe during the mid-1300s.
By the way, Joe, ditch the potato, chocolate and tomato argument. Potatoes, Chocolate and Tomatoes were all cultivated in Mexico and Central and South America; no one believes that the Templers ever got that far South to have run into them. Columbus would have because of where he landed. Corn I concede, but as I’ve pointed out there are representations of what people believe is corn carved into places where they shouldn’t be.
Irene
Hello Everyone,
DeleteSeems like a good time to point out something no one talks about. I was taught in school, "America comes from Amerigo". From what I've read over the years outside of the classroom, the Templars referred to the land we now call the United States as "La Merica". La Merica is said to mean "The Western Star". This would make us the United States of the Western Star, or in simplest terms...The United States of Venus.
Food for thought,
Anthony Warren
BTW- Irene,
I forgot to mention something very important about Cherchen Man. He's not European. His DNA is of East Asian origin.
Anthony,
DeleteFor people in Old World, Venus as an evening star would have set on that mysterious "known" land to the west and likely was called "The Western Star."
I'm good with that.
Irene,
DeleteThe confusion with Columbus is people try to put Templarism values (aka Monotheistic Dualism) on him when he was likely only lower level member of the Order of Christ. Based on his profound cruelty to the Caribbean Natives he probably wasn't initiated into the highest levels of the Order.
Clearly he was a businessman first and foremost.
Thank you, Scott!!!
DeleteIt's nice to finally run that idea past someone, who actually knew what I was talking about.
For what it's worth, I agree with your assessment of Columbus. I would only add the adjective "ruthless" to businessman. As much as the Italian communities love Columbus, I think it'll be interesting to see how these communities react, when they learn Columbus wasn't really Italian.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
Scott
DeleteCorrect me if I’m wrong but wasn’t Columbus’s connection to the Templers/Order of Christ through his wife? In other words, he wasn’t born into a Templer/Order of Christ family, he married into one. If so, he may have not been initiated at all or if he was, it would have been only into the lower ranks of the order, maybe because the upper ranks just didn’t trust him. He was an excellent salesman, and a businessman but he was a rotten human being.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteColumbus was connected to the St.Clair/Sinclair Family by marriage through the Drummond Family. You also right that he wasn't a high ranking member of the Order of Christ if he was one at all. Most Portuguese ship captains during the Age of Exploration were high ranking members including Henry the Navigator who was a Grand Master. Unless we find Columbus' name on a roll, which is highly unlikely, we simply won't know for sure.
As far as I'm concerned, the sooner we are done with Columbus Day the better.
Scott,
DeleteColumbus didn’t sail for Portugal, he sailed for Spain, and wasn’t he supposed to be Italian? While I don’t doubt that those that sailed for Portugal were high ranking members of the order, Columbus was not among them. His connection to the order was from marriage, not blood.
I wouldn’t mind changing Columbus Day to Explores Day. Let’s honor all those who sailed the ocean blue *before* 1492.
Irene
Irene,
DeleteFrom what I gather, Columbus lead the Catholics South of preexisting Templar colonies. You don't bring the enemy to your doorstep, you send them to someone else's. Are you familiar with the Catalans?
The Templars were far from being the first traders to exploit the Americas. There are many stories of "visiting gods" seeking out and mating with the offspring of the previous "visiting god". If that not creating a power base through a genetic line of kings, I don't know what is.
Anthony Warren
I vote: Enterprise Day
Irene,
DeleteYou are quite right that Columbus sailed for the King and Queen of Spain. However, I read somewhere that upon his return from one of his trips to the New World he stopped in Lisbon for a month before returning to Spain. I'll have to see if I can find that reference again.
How about: Native American's Day?
Scott and Irene,
DeleteMight have sent twice
I am sorry but have been away for some time and have not been able to respond. In response I would like to concentrate less on the KRS since that is a separate conversation and more on the narrative that Mr. Wolter has attached to it. The both of you are claiming that the Templar were on a clandestine mission with their several trips back and forth to North America. Exactly what evidence to you have that these were clandestine missions? Also if that is the case they still have to pack local North American food for the return trip to Europe. Are we to assume that they dump any left over food prior to coming to port back in Europe. To keep being clandestine they would have to make a cover story whenever a full crew with an empty cargo hold returns to port. According to Scott they made several voyages back and forth, is the local port authority part of the plan? Lets also talk about the other half of my initial argument of trading of food, goods and technology. Again Mr. Wolter is stating they made several trips back and forth so they would be aware of the weapons, tools and technology of the local groups in North America. They never brought European weapons or the technology to make stronger and more durable tools and weapons or even brought horses prior to Columbus. I can kind of understand your clandestine argument on bringing goods back to Europe. But in Mr. Wolter's narrative, the Templar are working with native North Americans marrying in to their tribes and assimilating to their culture. But are not going to bring items that would give their new allies a technological advantage against local adversaries or help their new partners grow. They would not attempting to hide from these new partners and due to their clandestine planning are keeping the Europeans ignorant. Also any Europeans that would arrive later would not know the technological level of the North Americans or know if horses are also native to this new land so there is no reason they would not share this with the local natives. What I am trying to state simply that I do not disagree that a small group of explorers from northern Europe could arrive into America around the dates of the KRS. There is nothing stating that this could not happen. But Mr. Wolter is attaching a much larger Templar narrative that there is simply no evidence to support.
Besides the Templar, Mr Wolter has also theorized on his show that several groups from Europe and the Middle East came over prior to Columbus including Egyptians and Phoenicians but not all of them would have the same clandestine behavior that you are claiming the Templar did.
Anonymous,
DeleteFirst, the Kensington, Spirit Pond, and Narragansett Rune Stones, and the Newport Tower, along with several other artifacts are evidence of clandestine missions by the Templar’s. Further, you might want to read the "C"-Doc chapter in my "Akhenaten to the Founding Fathers" book which is a report about a secret late 12th Century voyage to North America with multiple maps.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the Templar's learned new agricultural methods from Native Americans? In fact, the majority of the secrets taught to initiates in the Mide' win secret society of the Ojibwe are the uses of various plants, mostly for medicinal purposes.
How do you know what the intentions of the various other cultures were that came to North America before Columbus? Regardless of their motives, there is plenty of factual evidence of their presence to say nothing about what Native Americans know about the early visitors.
Hi Scott,
ReplyDeleteI just seen your show for the first time on H2 tonight. The last two episodes of season 3 had me intrigued. When you went to the Templar church I had noticed the M hand sign before you even had mentioned it. I noticed it because Martin Luther and Katherine Von Bora are my direct relatives and doing some research on them years ago I had seen some portraits of them making this "M" hand symbol and always wondered what it was about. This symbol with their hands also appears at Katherine Von Bora's tomb and I am sure probably many other places. A possible theory and you may already of heard this, but maybe it could be possible that the Templar had something to do with the reformation of the Catholic Church and helping Luther make the changes that he did. I could see this a possible because of what happened with the Templar's on October 13, 1307. Also another thing is that Luther's family seal (rose and cross) closely resembles one of the Rosicrucian symbols, the Rosicrucian's were somewhat like the freemason's a long time ago from what I can tell. I just thought it was interesting to see the "M" hand gesture in the episodes and have always thought maybe there was some kind of connection. Great show by the way! Definitely worth watching and really makes you think and want to work to solve our secret History.
Unknown,
DeleteI too was curious about the hand gesture and it was through working with two esoteric leaning Freemasons, one here in Minnesota and one in Europe that we finally figured it out.
Needless-to-say it was enlightening!
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteYou seem to catch a lot of flack for presenting old ideas with new evidence. I've been speculating about the Templar/Pirate connection for years. Came across a book titled, "Templar Pirates" by, Ernesto Frers in 2008. This book echoed my own speculation with a few lines of thought, I hadn't considered, or were new to me. I applaud the work your doing, by bringing forth solid evidence for what was once circumstantial, and speculation.
I can't wait to see what else has been found.
Absolutely geeked to pieces,
Anthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteThe flack is coming primarily from one idiot who is obsessed with harassing me. I only post the comments he makes that approach something constructive or to let people see how the skeptics really operate. They aren't serious and certainly aren't scientific in their argumentation. When they can't refute the evidence with facts, they try and attack your credentials, your methodology, or when all else fails they call you names. It goes with the territory.
I have Ernesto's book and it's a concise easy read about the same general thesis I've been working on for a while now. He gets it. Hope you enjoy the new shows coming up; it's gonna' get really good!
As per the disclaimer for your new show, isn't it a fact that Madagascar initially approved the endeavor for filming a television show. Once they found out that underwater excavation was taking place, they alerted UNESCO. True? And as per their report, this show was dead on arrival.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteAs usual, you have no idea what you are talking about. Just sit back, don't get yourself all spun up, and just enjoy the show.
Many years ago the old pro football coach of the Minnesota Vikings, Bud Grant, once said to me, "You never learn anything when you're talking."
You should try talking/typing less.
Is America Unearthed returning to TV this winter?
ReplyDeleteWhy is your new television show incorrectly referring to a hunk of lead ballast as being silver treasure? As a geologist, can't you easily distinguish lead from silver?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
DeleteFirst, the bar is a stamped ingot, not lead ballast. Second, it has not been definitively determined what the bar is made of. You certainly can’t trust anything UNESCO says since they have a well-known disdain for Barry Clifford and are actively trying to discredit him. Third, I have never personally seen the ingot so I can’t tell you what it's made of.
Regardless, for the research I did on the show the composition of the ingot is irrelevant. I am hoping to get a chance to see and hopefully test the bar at some point in the future. In any case, it’s certainly not "rock fill" UNESCA claims the ballast piles are. Something stinks with UNESCO’s “investigation” of Pirate Cove.
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteIs there any way to obtain a copy of your Drighton Rock images? I sure would like an opportunity to take a closer look. I believe, I can see some familiar symbols, however, it's really hard to tell from the television image.
If he hasn't already done so, Alan should take a look at Trinity Church. A place I'd never seen before. When I saw the structure on your show for the first time, I think, I felt like Alan did, when I told him about our Stainless Steel feminine symbol the St. Louis Arch. I still can't believe, he hadn't heard of it before, I told him. I feel the same way about myself, and Trinity. Thank you!!!
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteI don't know how to get a hold of those images except maybe to contact the company who did the scan. I still haven't seen the final high resolution images they generated a week after we did the scan.
Walker,
ReplyDeleteAMUN is on hold; won't be on this winter I'm afraid.
Hi Scott,
ReplyDeleteI do want you to that I'm feeling like I've just entered a room full of wolves. I want you to know how much I enjoy your programs! I always feel that I leave with a greater knowledge than I started with. I don't necessarily agree with you about Jesus and Mary M,. But that is another time. My father was a free mason when I was about 8 or9 years old. Unfortunately that ended for him when my parents divorced. I have his Masonic Bible. I had his trowel and apron until someone stole them. I can't believe people do such things with no remorse. I guess I'm getting off the main subject. I relly wanted to make a comment about John's remarks. My opinion is that according to him I guess I can't cook or paint my artwork unless I have a PHD.....I can't speak for anyone but myself, but, I have many layers and excel at quite afew. None of which I have any degrees in.God made many brilliant people who never even had any formal education much less even went to school. Thank you for all your efforts in trying to give those of us who love to learn outside the box! KEEP UP THE FANTASTIC WORK!
BB Fan,
ReplyDeleteDon't worry about a thing; we keep the wolves on a tight leash here and if debunkers start going after posters inappropriately they get put in the kennel.
You point about people without advanced degrees making meaningful contributions to all kinds of disciplines is really good one. Far too many academics have forgotten about common courtesy and humility. The have also forgotten how to listen and realize when they make a mistake they should own up to it and not attack those they should be thanking.
I appreciate the support and absolutely will continue on.
Mr. Wolter I consider myself an amateur historian simply because I am fascinated with "history" particularly southeastern Native Americans, the American Civil War and pre-Columbian history. I consistently read and study all aspects of my fascinations. I thoroughly enjoy all of your shows and blog and appreciate the information you provide for us to consider and either agree or disagree with. I agree with you on nearly everything you conclude and if I "disagree" I conduct further research instead of instantly disregarding and discrediting you. I live in the low country area of Georgia surrounded by history of all kinds. From dinosaur fossil finds to civil war battle sites untouched by modern civilization. There is not an inch of this part of America that wasn't occupied by native Americans. Since the age of 7 (46 at the time of this writing ) I have been collecting native American artifacts of all kinds all over south Georgia. I own a parcel of land that has produced thousands of arrowheads, pottery shards with hundreds of designs imprinted, and a couple of mounds (untouched, well hidden and secret) I was pleased with the first episode of AMUN investigating the Ocmulgee mounds and the possibility of a Mayan connection both there and in the mountains. I don't know if the area I study and research would be any importance to you but, my land is like none other in this entire region. The pottery shards consist of designs not classified in any reference book I've studied, the flint is unlike any in the multiple areas of Georgia I've researched and I've pulled several odd unidentifiable types of "rock" that our local university (Georgia Southern University) geology professor admits he's unsure of I would appreciate you considering doing research of the particular area. I know you are extremely busy and occupied with other projects and I definitely don't expect you to personally assist me in my endeavors but, maybe you have contacts in the Southeast that may be interested in research here. Thank you for your attempts to correct our history and reveal the truth of America. Mickey Altman
ReplyDeleteHi Scott. I've got something for you that may not be for public consumption on the blog, and it may be something you already know. For what it's worth, the "anonymous" here doing the harassment has piqued my interest, because I've seen the pattern before.
ReplyDeleteOn the conservative websites I occasionally frequent, I always read the comments following the article. They're often more entertaining than the article itself, and I learn things from time to time. There are some incredibly smart people out there that post.
In these comment sections there are often redundant trolls harassing the community at large. They're paid to do so. By whom exactly I don't know or much care. It's not too difficult to trace where big left-wing money originates from.
Your "anonymous" is one, although I imagine the funding comes from academia of some sort. Again, it's not too difficult to hypothesize who is being made uncomfortable by your spectacular findings.
I don't know if this knowledge is worth much of anything, but recognizing patterns is something I have down pretty good, and this dude fits the pattern. I just find it curious and somewhat amusing. Best of luck in your work.
Troutman,
ReplyDeleteI think your comments are appropriate to publish so readers can understand what goes on out there. I am well aware of the trolls who try to post their deception and harassment here. The most notable debunker maintains his own blog that is so full of crap it's amazing people actually read it. The good news is the debunker blogs are losing readers because people can sniff out BS and quickly grow tired of the over-the-top empty criticism and outright lies.
I'm actually inspired by debunkers because if we weren't making positive progress they wouldn't complain. I don't know or care who's paying them as their efforts will fail in the long run. People are tired of the historical cover-ups and incompetence are now demanding the truth to be told.
My colleagues and I will continue to do all we can to bring it out.
I wanted to watch your show last night but it was not on. I was very upset but found it today on demand on my cable tv. So I got to watch two more episodes. I enjoyed the treasure hunt very much but then in the second show you said Saint Anthony was the patron saint of thieves!!! I turn my tv off. I will not watch again until you take this back. I am big fan but Saint Anthony is patron saint of getting lost things back. He is not for thieves!!! You hurt me and my mother.
ReplyDeleteNam E'tisoppo
Nam,
DeleteNo need to get upset. The reason he was the patron saint of thieves is because Saint Anthony helped get lost things back. Many Pirates were looking for protection because they made a lot of things of 'get lost' that belonged to other people.
It's not my opinion, it's a fact that many pirates revered Saint Anthony for that reason.
It's OK to watch the show; no one was trying to offend anyone.
I beg to differ, my good man. If a pirate would claim any saint as their patron, that would be St. Nicholas of Myra, or the Wondermaker. Pirates embracing St. Anthony as their patron? From where did you learn this? I am most curious.
DeleteCheers,
Lesley
Lesley,
DeleteYou are welcome to disagree if you'd like. The information was shared by the historian working for production company whose name I can't recall. In any case, it made sense to me and I'm sure it's likely correct.
When I finally get a chance to watch the final two episodes and hear what I said, I'm sure it'll come back to me. I've been on the East Coast for a wedding and research and won't watch it until I get home in a couple of days.
I am sorry I do not wish to start a row, but it is not a matter of disagreement. If you stated that St. Anthony was the patron saint of thieves, you are entirely incorrect. St. Anthony is highly revered by Catholics and is one of a select few saints that can be depicted holding the Christ child. It is absolutely inconceivable that he could ever be considered the patron saint of thieves, or even pirates for that matter.
DeleteEven if your historian was trying to tell you that pirates would invoke him anyway, looking for protection, that is likewise untenable. Pirates, being sailors, were quite a superstitious lot. There is absolutely no reason to believe that they would chance invoking the wrath of a saint who protects the very people they plunder.
Forgive the impertinence, but I really do think you need to have a talking to with that historian. You also might want to consider at least a retraction to soothe Nam and his dear mum.
Cheers,
Lesley
Lesley,
Delete"Saint Anthony of Padua is the Patron Saint of Padua, of Portugal, and of San Antonio, Texas. Prayer cards manufactured in Italy identify him as the saint of "miracles," but to most Catholics, he is the Patron Saint associated with the return of lost articles and missing persons."
Here is the reference: http://www.luckymojo.com/saintanthony.html
It's all good Lesley
Thank you for retraction Mr. Scott. I will watch the show! Thank you also for the link to buy Saint Anthony oil and candles. Mother will be happy at Christmastime!
DeleteNam E'tisoppo
I think what they original poster misses is that no one is claiming that St. Anthony would have been O.K. with Piracy. What is being stated is that many pirates, rightly or wrongly chose St Anthony as someone to venerate. Patrons Saints were never the Patron Saint of anything while still alive. It was someone at a later date who decided they should be the Patron Saint of something.
DeleteHaving watched the episode in question, Mr. Wolter clearly stated that St. Anthony was the "patron saint of thieves", which unfortunately is entirely misconstrued. Furthermore, St. Anthony was canonized in 1232, less than a year after his death. Now it is true that sailors might have sought his blessings, but I would have to be shewn a competent source if you wished me to believe that pirates as a matter of course would dare invoke his name during their time of plunder.
DeleteCheers,
Lesley
Mr. Wolter,
ReplyDeleteAny good books/journals on the Talpiot Tomb you would recommend? I know it was mentioned as part of your research in Akhenaten, but I’d like to learn more. Your mention of the chevron circles is very compelling to me. Keep up the great work!
Randy
Randy,
DeleteI would read the two books written by Simcha Jacobovici. The first is "The Jesus Family Tomb" written with Charles Pellegrino, and, "The Jesus Discovery" written with James Tabor. The other really good book that has several scholarly papers about the tomb is "The tomb of Jesus and his Family?" which was edited by James H. Charlesworth.
Those books will get you up to speed quickly!
Hello Scott,
ReplyDeleteJust got to see the last two episodes of PTOTKT. Had to give up cable and internet for a week, or so. The top of the "Saint Anthony Head" was really interesting. I've seen several examples of the haircut, however, I'd never seen one with a dot in the center of the head before. Due to my understanding of sexual symbolism, the symbol reminded me of a view of my manhood, after swimming in frigid water. I then quickly recognized the Sun symbol of a circle with a dot at it's center. This in turn, brought back an old thought regarding the meaning of the symbol. Could the dot at the center represent Venus??? First came to mind while watching Venus's shadow move across the Sun during an eclipse. The whole display looked like a giant eyeball turning to gaze upon the Earth. As Venus neared the center of the solar disc, I thought to myself...If I were at a different position on the Earth, Venus's shadow would look just like the dot and circle symbol used for the Sun. This also brings to mind the center of the "Hooked X"/Tau symbol. My first thought was obelisk, and the casting of shadows. Now leaning towards Venus and her cross. Some people don't know, She has a crescent too.
I'm really intrigued by the "S" symbol on the silver ingot recovered. One needs to look no further than the Steve's guest blog for another example. This symbol is all around the "The chequy armorial at Tomar Portugal". I'm not sure what to make of it yet. I've seen other examples with variations on the slanted lines. These patterns of marked S's, I've come across remind me of the Serpent Mound alignments for some strange reason. I'm not saying this is the meaning only what comes to my mind. The similarities are uncanny. Two of the S symbols on "The chequy armorial at Tomar Portugal" seem to be part of a lunation triangle marked out by the tips of the leaves and the cross in the center. I'm not sure of the significance, I just keep coming across them.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
Ancient Hungarian writing
ReplyDeleteHas similar characters as the rune
Plus it is found all over the world
Sarah,
DeleteYou are right about that as there are a number of ancient alphabets that have characters similar to the "S" and to runes. All one has to do is spend a little time on Google. In the context of the metal ingot, whether silver or lead is irrelevant, it appears to be related to the Portuguese Templars in Goa, India.
Now the real fun begins!
Hello Mr. Wolter, will you please consider putting up another blog subject, finally? Since most of your TV programs are over, would you consider returning your attention back to the Kensington Rune Stone? I believe that's a real story.
ReplyDeleteSomeone who grew up in Alexandria just wrote a new book saying the rune stone is not real. I would like you to address his problem, if you don't mind going back to where you got your start. It looks like the rune stone needs more defending, and I think you might be a good man to defend it, one more time.
But I read on a website somewhere that you and that H. Holand before you both took the message on the rune stone wrong, about certain things. I looked over and over at the message, and it seems real simple. I don't know how people can become so confused. I guess by added stuff to what it really says.
I hope you can help clear some things up. Thank you for caring about history.
Peyton
Peyton,
ReplyDeleteThe student who wrote this book was to Minnesota by scholars in Sweden a couple of years ago to write a book that supports the negative opinion they reached over a century ago to try and maintain the status quo. There is no factual evidence to support a hoax so they continue to try to come up with 'hidden messages' and 'mythical stories' to try and prove their point. It's all utter nonsense.
I've been planning to post another KRS blog to prod the trolls to bring the best they've got. However, this particular post is more important than I think people realize. The Hooked X/Tau Cross on the Jesus ossuary lid is of profound importance and goes a long way to proving my overall thesis. Did you notice how silent the opponents have been, with the expectation of one 'Anonymous' poster who has tried hard, but brought nothing of merit?
Regardless, I'll start another thread soon about this new book and see what happens.
Oh, sorry, the book isn't by a student. It's by a David Krueger, and it just came out, so you may not have heard about it. I haven't read it yet, myself, though it seems clear that he doesn't think the rune stone is real. Boy, is he in for a surprise, like all the other doubters!
ReplyDeleteI think he's saying the modern Catholic Church likes the idea of the rune stone, instead of them maybe previously or even now trying to confuse things about it on purpose, if that's what you think. I'm a little bit confused, too.
So, first the Templars and the Catholic Church were friends, then they became enemies after they broke up. So, why does the Catholic Church like the rune stone today? Or, are they lying and want to discredit it, secretly?
But maybe you want to wait and address some of this in your new blog. Thanks!
Peyton
Peyton,
DeleteThe Templar's/Venus Families were always enemies. The Church just didn't figure out who the leadership of the Templar's really were for 200 years. If the Church still thinks the KRS is a Catholic document, they aren't paying attention. The only reason they embraced it in the beginning was to try and claim Catholicism was in North America earlier than it was. It was a self-serving wish they planned to use to their advantage.
The truth is the people who created the KRS were anything but Catholic.
"The truth is the people who created the KRS were anything but Catholic."
DeleteSo carving AVM on it was meant to throw folks off the trail? Brilliant!
Symbols almost always have multiple meanings; but then you already knew that. The catholic Church has borrowed virtually every symbol it uses from earlier cultures, and they are usually Pagan.
DeleteScott,
ReplyDeleteIn the movie “James Cameron Presents;The Lost Tomb of Jesus” Sumacha Jacobovici discovers an inscription on the wall inside of the Talpiot Tomb that was written in Aramaic or Greek. Was that inscription ever translated?
p@
Pasadena,
ReplyDeleteI vaguely remember reading that same thing somewhere. I'll ask Simcha and let you know.
Scott,
DeleteHas anyone interpeted the meaning of the Chevron and Circle symbol above the entrance of the Talpiot Tomb (Arch above Donut Shape ) ?
If turned upside down -It is somewhat like your Figure 12. above -- "One of the most important symbols in Royal Arch Freemasonry is the “Triple Tau” found on this Masonic apron within the Delta and the circle, both considered symbols of the Deity within the Craft. (Wolter, 2015) "
Also if one turns upside down the symbol of Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Cruces it is the same thing.
https://www.rosicrucian.org/history
p@
Pasadena,
DeleteThat's an interesting observation about both the flap of the Masonic apron of the Royal Arch and the logo of the Rosicrucian's. I have also pointed out the Talpiot Tomb chevron-circle was incorporated into the architecture of the Gothic Cathedrals and churches built by the Cistercians and Knights Templar after they had been digging in mysterious places after the First Crusade.
Are all these things a coincidence? I think not.
Scott,
DeleteIn the movie “James Cameron Presents; The Lost Tomb of Jesus” Simcha Jacobovici replaced the concrete cover over the entrance of the Talpiot Tomb. The Chevron/Circle and entrance to the tomb is still exposed under that cover.
My Theory of the Chevon/Circle-
The Chevron -is a symbol of an Ossuary Lid- some of the ossuaries found in the tombs of that time had a pyramid shaped lid.
The Circle -is a “Crown of Thorns” as placed on Jesus by the Romans.
Thus “ Burial Place of the Family of Jesus”
If you/Pelligrino or Simcha/Cameron ever get back to physically explore only the entrance of the tomb or by using a non-intrusive fiberscope camera. As a Forensic Geologist take a look at the Circle/Crown to see if has any thorns.
The Romans probably wouldn’t have allowed the “Crown of Thorns” symbol to be placed on the tomb but maybe the Templars carved it on the First Crusade?
The logo of the “The Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulture of Jerusalem” the First Crusaders has a “Crown of Thorns” on their logo. Knight in Armor wearing “Crown of Thorns” -all above ”Triple Tau” symbol.
What is your theory on the loose skull and bones found in the anti-chamber of the Talpiot Tomb?
p@
The Chevron/Circle symbol exists on every pack of Marlboro cigarettes.
DeleteAnthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteNot only that, the packaging has interesting colors...
Scott,
DeleteI don't think the pillars made by the "lb" are coincidence either.
Anthony Warren
Hello Scott,
DeleteDoes Alan, and Mrs. Wolter's book cover the Chevron/Circle being present on every baseball field? I didn't want to mention anything, just in case it's in their book.
Best regards,
Anthony Warren
Anthony,
DeleteThey have a whole chapter on the Masonic origins of the game of baseball, but they don't discuss the chevron/circle symbolism staring us all in the face.
Scott,
DeleteThe Chevron/Circle is also present on every Pool/Billiards Table too. I didn't mention it in the Sheep thread directed towards Alan. I was trying my best to avoid a ramble at the time. Too many ideas trying to come out at once.
Anthony Warren
Dear Scott sorry to be a bit of topic here, but i was watching your last series about the pirates and templars and there is something that would like to ask you. I am an amatuer researcher from Portugal following the templars and the secret routes to américa.
ReplyDeleteTherefore i would like to ask if you know about the work of the anthropologist from the 1950's, Jacques de Mahieu or if you've heard about artifact he have found in Paraguay?
And if you are familiarized with the story of "The Knigth of Corvo Island" ?
http://www.academia.edu/521995/The_Knight_of_Corvo_Island
Basically, what is your opinion on the south america hypothesis?
Thank you for your work.
Kind regards
Mário
MBP,
ReplyDeleteI am very aware of de Mahieu's book and have corresponded with his son in South America. I think he has done good work that should be followed up on.
I'll have to read the paper in the link you provided and will then comment. Thanks for passing this along.
Hi Scott,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy your shows. Alternate theories, where many add up, intrigue me.
Keep up the great work.
Paul,
South Australia
Paul,
DeleteThis comment isn't a criticism of you at all, but I find it interesting that people label the research I do as "alternate," "fringe," or use words that are very derogatory. To me, it's simply the truth.
I appreciate your taking the time the write and I just wanted to point out how the people who don't agree with my interpretation of certain facts, and are unable to refute them with facts of their own, feel the need to resort to personal attacks.
It's an interesting phenomenon in this arena and something I've grown very accustomed to on this blog and elsewhere. What it tells me is I'm on the right track.
Gday Scott,
DeleteI meant no offense :)
I say alternate as your research differs from the traditional thinking and I whole heartedly agree that you're on the right track.
Thank you for taking the time and please keep up your fantastic work
Kindest regards,
Paul
Paul,
DeleteNo offense taken. I think those of us trying to honestly and objectively find answers get tired of debunkers and dishonest skeptics name-calling when they have no where else to go. They need to put their heads back in the sand and get out of the way. We will keep forging ahead!
Scott,
ReplyDeleteJust saw your show for the first time today. I have been searching for months for someone to examine a few petroglyphs I discovered this last few months and I have a feeling what I hold in my possession may answer more than just a few questions you may have. Please check out the picture of one of my petroglyphs on Facebook and search key words "in to interpretations" and a colorful rock specimen is the only photo on the page, and this specimen is indeed real, I found this myself in a small creek, and cavern very similar to the caverns carved in the specimen, and the carvings on this rock are astonishing, especially with the images that are seen with 40x magnification. Please contact me on that Facebook page so I can properly reveal my identity. I've sent a few emails to a few universities, and didn't get anywhere. I have more than just this piece, I even have one that looks like the Spaniard who invaded the Incans, based on my own research. I am an amateur researcher, but feel I've done my homework well, and have ground breaking evidence I believe with my whole heart.
Hi Scott,
ReplyDeleteI have tried for several months to find someone to examine my recent petroglyphs discovery, but due to the nature of my pieces and the fact they have 22k gold embellishment on most, I fear sending out emails with pictures. I saw your show for the first time today, the episode focused on the possibility of America being inhabited by others who claimed land but the French stole claims or destroyed evidence. I didn't get a chance to really watch the whole thing so if I'm off by a bit, my apologies, however I think I hold the key to some answers. Please visit my Facebook page that has a picture of my newest discovery, a colorfully, intricately carved petroglyph I found myself. The image on Facebook is untouched, and only slightly contrasted in the second posted photo to show the back ground carvings, but this is totally real, and I have a few others that coincide to stories I've depicted off this particular specimen. Please message me on that page, and I will gladly disclose my identity, and the location this was found, for further investigation. I sure could use help and I have hit brick walls every where I turn. I never heard back from the two state universities I contacted either, and they got several other pictures of my other specimens. Thanks for your time, and interpretation :) -armature rock hound
Open Interpretation,
DeleteI would be happy to look at your photos if you care to send them to my private email: swolter@amengtest.com
So, in the "AVM" on the Kensington Rune Stone, the M does not stand for the Mother of Jesus, but for Mary, the wife of Jesus? This is why the KRS party were not Catholic?
ReplyDeleteSince you're no longer a TV fringe history adventure figure, maybe you will consider being a Blog fringe history adventure man, opening a new blog dealing with the Kensington Rune Stone again, for instance. Those hooked xs on it are real, that's for sure in my mind.
I was going to suggest that you say "post" templars, instead of templars, though. You will have more credibility about templars being involved in America if you call them "post" templars, since there weren't any actual templars still around at the time of the Kensington Rune Stone date, 1362. And of course you know the other rune stones on the East Coast with xs on them are dated a hundred years or so after the templars were put down.
Myself, I think templars were probably involved up in that Minn. area way before 1362, but I think, personally, their main Mary was Jesus's blessed mother, not His blessed wife.
Because praying to the wife of Jesus for help in time of need seems kind of weird, but maybe that's why God allowed the 10 men to die. I hope you can clear some of this up. Thank you.
Peyton
Peyton,
ReplyDeleteI don't appreciate your using the term, "fringe." If you want me to treat your inquiry with respect then I expect the same in return.
Secondly, you clearly don't understand Templar history and don't appear to have read my books. I suspect the slur was due to your apparent religious bias related to the truth about the Templars and the bloodline families of Jesus and Mary Magdalene.
Why don't you try posting again and leave out the personal slurs.
No slur was intended. I only thought it might be mutually agreed that you are looked at as a sort of fringe historian, since you seem to concentrate on artifacts and such that are usually looked at as being fringe, or issues being looked at but not in the usual academic sense.
ReplyDeleteThe subject matters themselves are often slurred as being fringe, which is one of the reasons why I used the word fringe in describing what you often work with. The Kensington Rune Stone is a big exception in my mind, because a bunch of people see it as being real. So in the case of the Kensington Rune Stone, I only consider the "spiritual" side of things as you see it to be fringe, but not the study of the rune stone itself.
No slur was intended, only a disagreement, as I'm only saying that most people studying the subject of the Kensington Rune Stone probably don't believe the Norsemen were involved with the ideology you have suggested. I purchased and read your hooked-x book, but not your other books because they seem far-fetched about the history of the hooked-x. I hope this won't make you angry or sad, but I can't help thinking that the last few hooked-xs you identified aren't really hooked-xs like on the Kensington Rune Stone.
Mr. Wolter, just because I don't see eye-to-eye about everything you believe doesn't mean I'm purposely slurring you. I just simply disagree with some points, and I think we both know that probably nobody is going to believe every single thing you believe. I do happen to like much of the work you put together in your hooked-x book, showing how very real the Kensington Rune Stone is, but I just don't agree about your bloodline findings.
I would like you to know that this has more to do with me believing that Jesus is real and alive today than it does about slurring you, which was not my intention. I'm sure not alone in thinking the AVM on the rune stone was an expression directed at Mary the mother of Jesus, especially since Catholics seem to be fixated on her. Mr. Wolter, I thought by now your skin would be a bit tougher than it is! I have tried my best to be polite while discussing an awkward subject with you.
I'm pretty sure plenty of people see even me as being fringe just because I believe in the Kensington Rune Stone--even though I don't happen to believe everything exactly as you do, which seems on the surface to be okay and not anything to get up-tight about, right?
Peyton
Peyton,
ReplyDelete"Fringe" is a derogatory term coined by on-line debunkers who have accomplished nothing. I believe you didn't mean it in a derogatory way, but it has become a negative slur to label people others disagree with. They can't argue their position with any logic or facts so they resort to name-calling and personal attacks. My skin is plenty thick, but I get tired and bored by this mentality. No offense intended.
As far as the Jesus and Mary Magdalene bloodline goes, I think you and I will have to respectfully agree to disagree. Interjecting faith into a discussion about facts and science simply doesn't work. You are welcome to believe whatever you want and I respect that.
It's all good.
Thank you. I like your response. Yes, the problem seems to be that spiritual issues can confuse things, since it's hard to know exactly what's in someone's head. Another problem seems to be that the facts and science are interpreted in different, sometimes odd ways. I have seen this from both sides, and it's especially discouraging to see academics purposely ignoring or misinterpreting scientific data to suit their career needs.
ReplyDeleteMr. Wolter, we "others" seeking history truth shouldn't be labeled as fringe, I agree, because if the "academics" are sometimes guilty of ignoring or misrepresenting the truth as proven by science, which as you know does occasionally happen, then those so-called academics are actually on the fringe, at least on the fringe of the truth.
So, it can go both ways, and as such, someone like Dr. David Krueger with his new book calling the Kensington Rune Stone a myth can be seen as a fringe figure, if someone might care to slur him. Why not? Okay, yes, he seems to be a fringe figure pretending to have all the answers, but pointing to a false conclusion.
In the end, the truth-bearers might finally be seen as the true academics, while those bringing us falsehoods can be seen as impostors, those truly on the fringe of truthful history. A list of people come to mind.
Oh, and thanks for opening up a new blog heading. I'm going to read through it now.
Peyton
Peyton,
ReplyDeleteI attended David Krueger's lecture at the University of the Minnesota a couple of week ago and it did nothing to add to the discussion. In fact, he tried to tie a myth to the "10 men red with blood and death" who were "killed by Indians" in 1362 to the Indian uprising of 1862. He continued by saying the hoaxer must have had irony of the 500 year-old parallel in their mind when they carved in the insciption. I then reminded the professor that no where in the inscription are Native Americans mentioned in any way. I further added that a thesis with a foundation of nothing is nothing.
I don't understand why so many of the soft science academics simply don't get it? It's amazing to me...
Hello Scott, I watched your program about the Templars in Portugal, and saw the symbols of the skull and crossbones in the old church. You commented that no one has an explanation for them? I just happened to be watching another program that mentioned that Crusaders are always buried with their thigh bones crossed. Have these two things been linked- I don't know what has already been stated, so I may be stating the stupidly obvious here, but this would seem to link the two things. And on another show that was identifying sunken pirate wrecks...There is an island called Sainte Marie Island | Ile Aux Nattes | Madagascar. It was known as a historical pirate locale- those pirates looted ships that were returning from the crusades, and other places. Could some of them been templars? There was also another small island near this main island where the pirates would go to purchase supplies, and the program I saw talked about a hidden tunnel,on this small island, that was marked on one end with a large stone. They found the tunnel with ground penetrating radar and then found the stone. The stone was inscribed with symbols, one of which looked very much like one of the runes you show-- two diamonds stacked one on top of the other with the pointed ends touching. The show theorized that this was a common marker symbol used on nautical maps of the day- but why put that on a rock near a tunnel on an island not near anything that the symbol supposedly shows. and they never tied the symbol to anything in the area. I thought the symbols were interesting and might be templar related.. Oh, and one last thing, there was a famous pirate hanged on a ship after being lured out to it, and as he was about to be hanged, he tossed a map on the ground saying go ahead and try to find my treasure.- the map was written in code symbols as well.
ReplyDelete