Atlantis Online
November 25, 2020, 10:23:27 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Remains of ancient civilisation discovered on the bottom of a lake
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20071227/94372640.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Patagon


Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Patagon  (Read 1974 times)
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« on: June 13, 2007, 03:17:36 pm »



1840s (fanciful) illustration of a Patagon chief from near the Straits of Magellan, bedecked in costume of war; from "Voyage au pole sud et dans l'Oceanie…" by French explorer Jules Dumont d'Urville


The Patagones or Patagonian giants are a mythical race of people, who first began to appear in early European accounts of the then little-known region and coastline of Patagonia. They were supposed to have exceeded at least double normal human height, some accounts giving heights of 12 to 15 feet or more. Tales of these improbable people would take a hold over European concepts of the region for some 250 years, until they were substantially debunked at the end of the 18th century. However, South American legends speak of several giant tribal races, such as the Chancas or Chanak of Peru, which are said to be 7 feet tall on average, and have red hair.

First mention of these people came from the voyage of Ferdinand Magellan and his crew, who claimed to have seen them while exploring the coastline of South America en route to their circumnavigation of the world in the 1520s. Antonio Pigafetta, one of the expedition's few survivors and the chronicler of Magellan's expedition, wrote in his account about their encounter with natives twice a normal person's height:

"One day we suddenly saw a naked man of giant stature on the shore of the port, dancing, singing, and throwing dust on his head. The captain-general [i.e., Magellan] sent one of our men to the giant so that he might perform the same actions as a sign of peace. Having done that, the man led the giant to an islet where the captain-general was waiting. When the giant was in the captain-general’s and our presence he marveled greatly, and made signs with one finger raised upward, believing that we had come from the sky. He was so tall that we reached only to his waist, and he was well proportioned..."
Pigafetta also recorded that Magellan had bestowed the name "Patagão" (or Patagoni) on these people, but did not further elaborate on his reasons for doing so. Since Pigafetta's time the assumption that this derived from pata or foot took hold, and "Patagonia" was interpreted to mean "Land of the Bigfeet".

However, this etymology remains questionable, since amongst other things the meaning of the suffix -gon is unclear. Nevertheless, the name "Patagonia" stuck, as did the notion that the local inhabitants were giants. Early maps of the New World afterwards would sometimes attach the label regio gigantum ("region of giants") to the area.

Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2007, 03:18:55 pm »



1840s illustration of Patagon encampment; from account by French explorer Jules Dumont d'Urville

In 1579, Sir Francis Drake's ship chaplain, Francis Fletcher, wrote about meeting very tall Patagonians.

In the 1590s, Anthonie Knivet claimed he had seen dead bodies 12 feet long in Patagonia.

In 1766, a rumour leaked out upon their return to England that the crew of HMS Dolphin, captained by Commodore John Byron, had seen a tribe of nine-foot tall natives in Patagonia when they passed by there on their circumnavigation of the globe. However, when a newly-edited revised account of the voyage came out in 1773, the Patagonians were recorded as being merely 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m); tall perhaps, but by no means giants.

The people encountered by Byron were in all likelihood the Tehuelches, indigenous to the region. Later writers consider the Patagonian giants to have been a hoax, or at least an exaggeration and mis-telling of earlier European accounts of the region.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patagon
Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #2 on: June 13, 2007, 03:21:09 pm »

The Patagonian Giants




"A sailor giving a Patagonian woman a piece of bread for her baby."—Detail from the frontispiece to A Voyage round the World, in his Majesty's ship the Dolphin, commanded by the Hon. Comm. Byron, 1767In 1766 the Dolphin, a ship commanded by Commodore John Byron (nicknamed "Foul-Weather Jack" and grandfather of the poet Byron) returned to London from circumnavigating the globe. While it lay in dock, a rumor leaked out that the crew of the Dolphin had encountered a tribe of nine-foot giants in Patagonia, South America. This rumor first appeared in print on May 9, 1766 in the Gentleman's Magazine. Other newspapers, such as the London Chronicle, then picked up the story.

The rumor soon gained widespread acceptance. Its credibility was helped by the fact that it built upon a large number of earlier accounts of Patagonian giants. For instance, Antonio Pigafetta, who sailed with Magellan in the 1520s, had written of an encounter with a race of South American giants. According to Pigafetta, Magellan referred to these giants as 'Patagons' because of their big feet, and so the southern tip of South America came to be known as Patagonia.

In 1578, Sir Francis Drake's ship chaplain, Francis Fletcher, also wrote a manuscript that described meeting very tall Patagonians. In the 1590s, Anthonie Knivet, who had sailed with Sir Thomas Cavendish, claimed that he had seen dead bodies in Patagonia measuring over twelve feet in length.

A long-running scientific debate also gave fuel to the rumors of a race of South American giants. The great French natural philosopher, Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon (1707-1788) had argued that animals and plants of the New World were small and degenerate in comparison to their European counterparts (this was before Europeans had done much exploring in the Americas). Buffon's opponents seized upon and promoted the rumors of South American giants in order to prove Buffon's theory of New World degeneracy wrong.




Detail from an engraving in the East and West Indian Mirror, 1619. It shows a group of Dutch sailors gazing down into the grave of a giant unearthed in South America in the year 1615.The 1766 report of Patagonian giants did encounter some initial skepticism. The Journal Encyclopedique printed a letter from M. De La Condamine arguing that the report was a hoax spread by the English in order to camouflage their real motive in sending another expedition to Argentina, which was to exploit a mine recently discovered there. Horace Walpole also wrote a satirical piece titled An Account of the Geantz recently discovered, addressed to a friend, in which he suggested that Byron should have sent some of the Patagonian women back home to England in order to be used to improve the English breed. Despite these notes of skepticism, widespread belief in the rumor persisted.

The rumors of Patagonian giants were only definitively proven to be fictitious when the official account of Byron's voyage appeared in 1773. This account revealed that Byron had indeed encountered a tribe of Patagonians, but that the tallest among them measured only 6 feet 6 inches. In other words, they were tall, but not 12 foot giants. The tribe that Byron met was probably the Tehuelches, who were wiped out by the Rocca expedition in 1880.


References/Further Reading:
Adams, Percy G. Travelers and Travel Liars: 1660-1800. University of California Press. 1962. Chapter Two.

Main Page  Comments  Search  Back to Gallery:
1700-1799 


Text copyright © 2002 Alex BoeseHoax Museum ContentMain Page (Weblog)Recent CommentsRSS Feed (2.0)ForumSearchContactWeblog CategoriesRegisterLoginBefore 17001700-17991800-18681869-19131914-19491950-19761977-19891990-1999After 2000Top 100 April FoolsTop 10 Worst AFsHistory of AF DayHoax WebsitesHoax PhotosTop 10 College PranksBirth HoaxesTall-Tale CreaturesHoax Photo Test 1Hoax Photo Test 2Hoax Photo Test 3Hoax Photo Test 4Gullibility Test 1Gullibility Test 2April Fools TestChristmas TestAbout the MuseumAbout the CuratorHippo Eats Dwarf
Hoaxes: 1700-1799Native of FormosaJonathan Swift HoaxesBickerstaff PredictionsBeringers Lying StonesMary Toft + Rabbit BabiesBen Franklin HoaxesSilence DogoodWitch TrialDeath of Titan LeedsEnigmatical PropheciesPolly Baker CaseChronicle SupplementLiterary HoaxesJames MacphersonThomas ChattertonDe Situ BrittaniaeWilliam Henry IrelandGreat Chess AutomatonMystery of MadagascarLinnaeus ButterflyGrahams Celestial BedPatagonian GiantsConnecticut Blue LawsDuckbilled Platypus

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/patagonia.html
Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
Mark of Australia
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 703



« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2007, 03:37:05 pm »

Hi Faith ,

Hate to be pendantic but don't you mean 'Patagonia'.

Report Spam   Logged
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #4 on: June 15, 2007, 02:49:11 am »

Hi Mark, actually "Patagon" simply the name of the article.  I gather that the land that the giants were on could be referred to as either Patagon or Patagonia, though, you'd be right in assuming that the second is the more common usage.

God Bless

+Faith+
Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
Mark of Australia
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 703



« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2007, 03:18:10 am »

Faith ,

I've heard it said that the Patagonians had similar features to Australian Aborigines and that there skulls are similar to eachother moreso than to any other races.

There was a famous Argentinian anthropolist ,Ameghino, of the late 19th century who claimed that the human race originated around Patagonia. He has been discredited but he based his conclusions on the unusual fossils he found there. He is featured in 'Forbidden Archaeology'
Report Spam   Logged
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2007, 02:07:18 pm »

Hi Mark, I keep meaning to read that book as I have heard many exciting things about it.  I have the abridged version, but it isn't as comrehensive.  Does it have anything about it that could be said to relate to the Nephilim?

God Bless

+Faith+

Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
Mark of Australia
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 703



« Reply #7 on: June 25, 2007, 02:42:42 pm »

Hi Faith ,

No ,nothing directly relating to the Nephilim but the book has far reaching implications that may well have a bearing on the question of the Nephilim. Because if there really was some earlier epoch of civilisation that the Nephilim are associated with then Forbidden Archaeology can be seen as paving the way for study of it.

The full version of 'Forbidden' is heavy reading if you aren't really well versed on philosophy of science and archaeological method.It's not for the faint hearted.. If you are able to realise the full impliocations of the book it is pretty breathtaking..  I have a review thread of it in Alternate Archaeology in case you didnt know  Smiley
Report Spam   Logged
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #8 on: July 01, 2007, 04:48:28 pm »

Hi Mark,

I prefer to find a median where science meets religion and both can agree, on something.  Do you believe in the Nephilim yourself?

God Bless,

+Faith+
Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
KTCat
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 248



« Reply #9 on: July 01, 2007, 09:55:56 pm »

Hi Faith,

I think you might enjoy the following site...

http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/Mid.East/Mid.East.html

I certainly believe the Nephilim were real, because I've seen pictures of the giants' skulls that have been found, and I don't think I want to meet one! They were very different looking and certainly not human by our standards. But those skeletal remains are really few and far between. What few giant skulls have been found were mostly found in Egypt, Malta and Peru. You can see pictures of the skulls here if you scroll down to the center of the page.

http://www.light1998.com/TASTE_TREAT.htm

In the Old Testament, the slaughter of Canaan's residents was justified on the grounds that they were the giants of the Nephilim race, but quite frankly, the archeological evidence just doesn't back that up. Jericho, for instance, has been found, and the walls in the houses there are only six feet high; which hardly qualifies those houses as  habitats for giants. I also have the distinct and unhappy impression that the Israelites would have slaughtered anyone who may have been able to qualify for the NBA on the grounds that they were giants, when in fact, there appears to be a very big difference between the Nephilim and people who are simply very tall or very big. Canaan was also home to many people from Africa, and many of Africa's tribal people are notoriously tall. I have looked at the archeological evidence, and so far there really just isn't a whole lot to justify the slaughter of the Canaanite people on the grounds that they were giants; most of the Biblical tales we've been told actually look like they were based upon hearsay, or perhaps the priesthood had some other reason for telling tales. Thousands and thousands of Canaanite grave sites have now been found, and so far there just aren't any giant skeletons. So, while the reality of the Nephilim has certainly been established; that Nephilim giants actually occupied Canaan has yet to be born out by the archeological evidence.
Report Spam   Logged

Live Long and Prosper, but please be kind to each other...
+Faith+
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4249



« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2007, 12:26:41 am »

Thanks for the information on Jericho, KTCat, I don't believe that the Canaanites were giants either. I wouldn't be too quick to characterize the Israelites.  Just as there is no archaeological evidence for the giants that the Israelites faced, much hasn't been uncovered to characterize their battles either.  Nothing has been uncovered to prove the truth of Exodus, and I haven't seen much on the battle of Jericho either, we can't doubt their miracles while accepting their bloodthirstiness, not with proof of either.  I believe that the Bible speaks metaphorically of these things and, like all history, tends to exaggerate at times.  Sadly, blood was shed by all the ancient people of those days.

I have seen the Steve Quayle and other giant sites before.  I really like the passages he has collected of giants, but I agree, I haven't seen any proof that these are the descendents of the Nephilim. Most of the skulls look more like the offspring of aliens and humans than humans and angels.  And even the biggest is still quite small (by Blblical terms) 7-9 feet tall at best.

The Nephilim were huge.  Some descriptions have them as big as 400 feet tall.

That there remains no trace of them is not difficult to understand.  The Bible says that God wiped all traces from the earth.

I wa particularly disappointed that this picture turned out to be a hoax:



God Bless,

+Faith+
Report Spam   Logged

(Psalms) 31:5,
"Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O LORD, the God of truth."
BlueHue
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1126


il mio va Piano, sono Asino ?


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2007, 11:11:07 am »

SORRY TCAT, & Faith,

GOG and MAGOG
were the TWO GIANTS that were dressed like GOLIATH(= of AZAES, in OGYGIA)
they represented the two 'halves 'of the Twin-empire of EGYPT.


PREPARE FOR DESILLUSION: Other 'Giants 'in Greek Myths, like Briareus, Othos and Ephialtes were just vulcanoes that gassed out.


When Caleb & Joshua reconoitered PALESTINE/ CANAAN, they Lied that the Towers that lined the citywall were taller than in Egypt. and the People( Taht were seated on Elephants !!) were trice as tall as ( normal)pedestrians, that is a TALL story, but since ' GEORGEOS ' has pointed out that Greek is a strange language to translate these incomplete sentencesinto Latin or English  can occasionally begetting another non intended meaning. No transcription is perfect !


Since this is a POST-TOPIC on PATAGONS I'd  like to Recite an historical anecdote on the very subject.( it allready was publicized on ' Atlantis Rising ' 2 years ago burried somewhere.)


I haven't been following this Patagonial discussion conversation in details much, but whatever, whenever I see the words ANAK, KANAKES or Anakim in Connection with: NEPHILLIM- in- RAPHIDDIM,


I feel that I must say that these GIANTS or  ( which is PLATO's name for the Eliphants that dwelled as"GUARDIANS'on the Rock upon which the Palace of ( Cleito &) POSEIDON stood. oThese Voraciousd animals, just White- GIANT-OGYGOS-ceremonial-$Elephants- of - Atlantis.


The very name ELEPHANT means EL-of-Phant or simply GOD-of-PUNT,  after an Earth-Quake this Elephant as God was villified as SATAN,  in the Bible.


SATAN however comes from the Egyptian-Word for Vice-Roy or KING(= SETEN.)so SATAN de POENIS-INFERNO, means KING of the Underworld.


Elephants were equated with DRAGONS that had traditionally a LONG NECK(= a snout or trunq.)and wings( the animal's flappy Ears.) infact altough present "DRAGONS"look like Lizzards, the ancient Dragon's were just painted Elephants even the CHINESE Drageons may, nay must have been originally the atlantean-White Elephants.


About HITTITES:

The egyptians named the inhabitants of SOUTH-ARABIA, the Chapiroi / Kabiroi, or CHITTIM thus. cHATTI or even Mitannii.in Hadramaut.  When the Assyrians took -over Hadramaut, from the Egyptian hegemony of ACHNATON,  in 855 bc ( revised Chronology.)after a global Earth-Quaker the Assyrian King Salmanasse-3( 859-824 bc.) added to his Title of the King of Summur also that of Hatti


Thus King Salmanasser-3 was the FIRST assyrian king to bear the -combination-Title of ( Great-)King of-SUMMUR; HATTI  & ACCAD.

Sincerely : " BlueHue " dd. 2- Juli--2007

PS,
in 1860 a British Navy-Captain by the name of MUSTERS- CHAWORTH delivered a group of Welsh sheepfarmers to Patagonia ( I ignore which part.)  A Grand Chakike or Paramount Chief Indian enlisted him as a Secretary to write a letter to the Queen of England.


In that Letter this Indian Chieftan ( i forgot the name of that particular indian TRIBE.) offered to become a british subject, but at the time Britain was not intrested to Colonize Patagonia, so it just took Position in the Falkland Isles.


However to make matters more intresting for the British Crown, this Navy Comodore MUSTERS, presented himself to the Queen's foreign Office minister in Whitehall as:  KING- of- the PATAGONIANS, but to no avail, because Britain wanted Cowbeeaf farmers but the Vulcanic soil in Patagonia -unlike the Cattlebeef barons of the North in Rio del Plata, could only support sheep because the fertile layer of the ice-age worSOUTH- Patagonian-soil was too thin and eroded.


So without opposition in writing  from any government the NEXT ten years this Naval Comodore MUSTERS stayed internationally and diplomatically known as GEORGE-1, KING- of-the - PATAGONIANS and even RE-Named Lake Sarmiento or HUANAGO after himself as:" LAGO- MUSTERS " ( You can Check this out by Google, but not all modern Maps bear that english Lakie name in present Argentine becausae of animosity after 1948.


On this folklore TITLE George, became the Gouvernor-General for the British Guinea or Gold-Coast in Mid-AFRIKA where he died in 1870 of yellow fever.


With the King's title now Vacant in CARMEN- de- PATAGONAS two adventures took it on, to devellop this Land.


The First person a denaturalized Frenchman, borrowed money, from the Indian Paramount-Chief,  and went to England and France to get money for European colonisation, but again Britain & now France were not intrested in a free colony in badlands Patagon


(PATAGON & Fire-Isle, )which was bigger in size than Afghanistan,  But the the British in Afghanistan wanted to outwit the Russians, and despite of little gains,  did lose 500.000 soldiers in ten years time to conquer and lose Afghanistan and the South African Boers-Countries combined( until their victory at Mafeking in 1902.)


The British refusal to  been presented as FREE-present: The Indian STATE of PATAGONAS, in: 1860 and  1865, of the( Indian-) lands of  Patagonia to colonize as British-Protectorate, but was rejected because of Dusty BAD-Lands, strikes me as if the Russians would have offered Alaska FREE to the US in 1865, but they would refuse it on account that there was only SNOW there !!


So now when the Grand Nations refused hegemony over Patagonia the adjacent countries got an intrest in annexing Patagonia, Chile took a Coastal strip and Rio del PLATA got Fire-Isle but in the middle there was a battle of MENDOZA-Mountains between 20.000 Spanish PEONES and 2.000 prairy INDIANS, who ofcourse lost, so in
1868 a PEACE TREATY between Chile and Rio-del-PLATA was signed"With the Mountains of Mendosa as Garantee-lines of a free Patagonia.


Alas in 1872 a General RIVAL-da-VIVAL or someting found it neccessary to found a new Argentine State incorporating free Patagon, by slaying the current inhabitants who fled to Chile, and in 1973, back to Europe as indian-Artpreformers.


WHEN in 1985 ?? I forgot the date, the Argentine British war over the Falklands Dominion started because the were as Spanish and thus Argentine dependancy, I wanted to avoid that war by making the then british Minister of Foreign Affairs LORD  SHACKLETON, aware that the Argentine Claim on British-Antartica's territory and the Falklands-dependancies, in this - extraordinary-  case
was bogus.


BECAUSE inbetween the years 1860- 1870, the titleholder of Patagonia as a FREE-STATE was a british SUBJECT, and the then State of RIO-del-Plata made NO claims on Falklndsa or Georgeanisllands nor British Antartica because Argentine did not exist and it's old rump state was not near those -now- contested places.


Argentine claims that the British took the Falklands from the Spanish in 1822 abandonned it than the Frech took it from 1822 until 1834, then the British returned
and since only 1948 the Argentine state demanded as ancient Heir of the Spanish colonialists the Falklands back( which was never Argentinés property  in the First Place.)


Argentine's claim on ( british-)Antartica Territories and the Falkland-dependancies, are solely derived and based on the emergence of the Argentine State(-us.)in 1872
The way that Argentina got Patagonia was by an illegal Civil war, when it oly beecame apparent later that Antartica, and Falklands were bordering the former Free Patagonia.


The stupid thing is that Britian first failed to protect it's british subjects the welsh sheepfarmers that were in Patagonia during the TWO " Civil " wars in 1868-72 and secondly recognize Argentina as a new State after selling out british property in Patagonia/ Argentine in 1948. Britain gave them a finger and they took the whole hand !~


Anyway, AFTER the British/ Argentine Falkland War I got indeed a reply-Letter from the British foreign Office whitehall-London, stating that  "To avoid war in the Falklands it was worthy to, first  consider Argentine's claim on the Falklands on historical grounds as a Fake Claim,


to say that the ( arrogant-)Argentines forget or don't know their own formative State-history, thus to shame them in retreating, as trespassers, to make their 'CASE "of land-pickpockett ",  a laughingstock and avoid any bloodshed.   The letter ended with the statement that the British goverment was aware of the title of: " KING- of-the- PATAGONS "of Comodore GEORGE- MUSTERS, and reseach legal posibilities to get the Argentines out-of-The Falklands, Hmmmmm.


AFTERMATH:
in 2005 I read a book by an Argentine ADVOCADO-or- LAWYER,who's grandfather in 1870, after the death in ( african-)British Guinea) of the last Claimant of the title " KING -of-Patagonas " went to the State-Office to Claim this Title for his posterity.
as an Alzheimer Case, I cannot recall this man's name but he never tried the golden oppertunity, to restate his claim to save the Falklands the legal way as I had tried.


I could lie and tell a fib that Comodore GEORGE MUSTERS CHAWORTH was my Great-Grand-Uncle,  and as the only ' relative-collateral -gognate- second-cousin'  left , that  I thus am the Legal claimant of the vacant- title of " KING- of- the- PATAGONAS " but alas My Great-grand-Uncle , the comodore-gouvernor-general, has forgotten to write a Kingdom-constitution, with right to the throne's succession.


Anyway, with a statecondition of Alzheimer( first-Phase.)I could not lead an underdevelloped nation if I wanted too besides I hate Spanish Greek & Russian languages ( with No offence to: ' GEORGEOS ' Diaz-Monttexano. )but this Forum Thread-Patagon-Post-visitors members may call me " YOUR MAJESTY ".)dd. 2 - Juli- 2007.


Sincerely yours truly  :  " BlueHue " Cry   Cry   Cry
PLEASE READ my ' Subscript 'If you don't like this discovery, tell me don 't keep your mouth to yourselves !
« Last Edit: July 02, 2007, 01:03:50 pm by BlueHue » Report Spam   Logged

( Blue's)THEORY, locating"original" Atlantis( in Aden-Yemen.)
1: ATLANTIS =Fake=Latin name, original Greek: ATHE(=a Region in Aden)
2: Atlantic-OCEAN=Greek: RIVER-of-Atlas+also" Known "World-OCEAN(=Red-Sea)
3: Greek-obsolete-Numeral 'X' caused Plato's Atlantisdate:9000=900
KTCat
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 248



« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2007, 01:04:51 pm »

BlueHue said, "SATAN however comes from the Egyptian-Word for Vice-Roy or KING(= SETEN.)so SATAN de POENIS-INFERNO, means KING of the Underworld."

Well actually Blue, I am going to have to adamantly disagree with you here. It is far more likely that the word Satan is derived from the Egyptian phrase SA.ATEN. "Sa" was the Egyptian word meaning "son of". It could also mean "spirit of" and because it was written hieroglyphically by the symbol of a duck, it could also mean "duck." Neither the Egyptians or the Hebrews had a written language that contained vowels, so when the original Hebrew texts were translated, the vowels that were chosen was pretty much a crap shoot. Throughout the texts, you will find that the vowels e, a, and i were regularly interchanged, as were the vowels o and u. In the process, the original meanings of many words were terribly, terribly botched. In some cases, we might simply say this was due to human error, however there is much to suggest that priests and scribes often had an agenda of their own, and some of those mistranslations may have well been quite intentional.

Atenism may sound innocent enough on the surface, but ultimately "the one god" as expressed by Atenism was an unknown concept until around 2000 BC when Ra, the god of the Heliopolitan sun god cult rose to power throughout Egypt and the entire Middle East. In Babylon and Sumer, Ra was called Marduk, so we can all count on the fact that he was known far and wide. The Heliopolitan sun god cult was not just made up of its priesthood; there was also an Egyptian army  devoted to the sun god cult, and in the years preceding 2000 BC they regularly attacked the nomes of other Egyptian gods, as well as attacked the city/states of other gods (i.e. rulers) throughout the Middle East. Thoroughly human rulers were referred to as "gods" in those days, and were deified as such, but originally the word "god" did not seem to mean "God with a capital G;" it was basically a term signifying a political leader, usually a king, who was the ruler of a specific territory. One might compare it to the way "Lord" is still given as a title in England to this day. As Ra rose to power, his priesthood began calling Ra by the name "Aten" and they also declared him to be the "one god" and demanded that all other gods be subservient to him. Typically the priesthood would send Ra's army to the nome or city/state of another god whereupon they gave that god and his priesthood the option of either agreeing to their demands or getting offed by Ra's army. When the god of anther territory accepted Ra's terms, his  name was simply "absorbed" into the "one god" religion of Atenism, and his name was added to the list of names said to represent Aten-Ra. To date, scholars have surmised that Ra had absorbed at least 75 known names in Egypt, and as Marduk of Babylon, he absorbed the names of another 50 known gods. After that I think most of us have just given up trying to count them. Those gods' past accomplishments as kings and rulers were also "absorbed" into the sun-god cult and ultimately that god's past deeds and reputation became part of "the Great Aten" or the "one god" of Egyptian sun god fame. Those who did not agree to Ra's demands were usually unceremoniously killed, and once dead, those gods were simply absorbed into the cult of Atenism anyway.

Atenism was not a very popular concept, and for good reason. The reason Atenism was so unpopular is because it really had nothing to do with "God" as we might interpret that word today. Atenism was frowned upon because beneath all the glowing words of the infamous Akhenaton, as well as various other members of the Heliopolitan priesthood preaching the same concepts, was a political move that amounted to tyranny and despotism of the worst kind. Ra's version of Atenism was seen by many as an attempt to circumvent the power of the omnipotent God, and was seen as a religious/political move that was attempting to replace the ideal of "One God" i.e. an acknowledged spiritual presence that was way beyond "the gods" of human political office, and an attempt to replace that far greater spiritual truth with utter tyranny and make a religion out of it.

To many, Atenism was seen as the ultimate attempt to usurp the power of the Greater Universal God, and it was viewed as a blatant attempt by Ra and his priesthood to set Ra's throne of the solar deity cult above that of the Universal God. Hence, anyone who worshipped Ra as the power behind Atenism was known as a "Sa.Aten" i.e. a "son of Aten" and eventually the words "Sa.Aten" became translated in the much later Biblical texts as "Satan".


« Last Edit: July 02, 2007, 01:10:56 pm by KTCat » Report Spam   Logged

Live Long and Prosper, but please be kind to each other...
BlueHue
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 1126


il mio va Piano, sono Asino ?


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2007, 01:10:21 pm »

BlueHue said, "SATAN however comes from the Egyptian-Word for Vice-Roy or KING(= SETEN.)so SATAN de POENIS-INFERNO, means KING of the Underworld."

Well actually Blue, I am going to have to adamantly disagree with you here. It is far more likely that the word Satan is derived from the Egyptian phrase SA.ATEN. "Sa" was the Egyptian word meaning "son of". the symbol of a duck, it could also mean "duck."there was also an Egyptian army  devoted to the sun god cult,the word "god" did not seem to mean "God with a capital G;" it was basically a term signifying a political leader,

 SmileyBLOTSHED:

indeed SATAN or SETEN is a contraction of a larger wording. SAKARE or SEMANKARE ( 'son-of Amun, or Vice-Roi of Amun.')a worshipper of ATON ? with ThutAnk-ATON for a brother-co-ruler during ACHNATON's blindness,  that had to go wrong !( =Seven against Thebes.)


SATAN or SATEN does mean (Vice-) ROI-of-ATON, the Term SON-of-a LAND is often pertaining only to the First -Man, or Headman or Ruler.  Thus even Adam may be demonized as he was not the first man on Earth but the King of his Country of AD. and thus his EVE the First Lady. ( Eve is not a contraction of Hebat= HEQ-ATHE but of NEPHELE.= Goddess from the Clouds.)


Thus when it was said that PRINCESS Europa was a DAUGHTER of-PHOENIX, it did not mean, that Phoenix was her father but that she was QUEEN of-PHOENICIA.


Few Jews nor Historians, realize that the capital of Judea, Jerusalem is nicknamed " DAUGHTER-of-SION "
which equally may mean QUEEN-City of Heavens, but the Mother-of-Sion must be another parent-City elsewhere.


SION is a wordcorruption of POSION or POSEIDON, which was originally writtenL: RAS- ADEN.(= Jerusalem as ADEN in Yemen.)  JUDEA bis also a word-corruption of: IO-DAN which simply bmenas " LAND-of-AD " thus:  ATLANTIS.


Sorry for this confusing " play-of-Words "  Sincerely,  :' BlueHue ' Cry    Cry     Cry


PS,
Your non comment on my Patagonial King story may mena that you are not inbtrested in the PATAGONS/ it just happened in your Pathway Huh

And what about my Subscript doesn't that merit a comment from a GOOD-Reader ??

THANK  YOU for your speedy reply. Grin
« Last Edit: July 02, 2007, 01:36:05 pm by BlueHue » Report Spam   Logged

( Blue's)THEORY, locating"original" Atlantis( in Aden-Yemen.)
1: ATLANTIS =Fake=Latin name, original Greek: ATHE(=a Region in Aden)
2: Atlantic-OCEAN=Greek: RIVER-of-Atlas+also" Known "World-OCEAN(=Red-Sea)
3: Greek-obsolete-Numeral 'X' caused Plato's Atlantisdate:9000=900
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy