Its 2020, a cool-sounding year, & so time for a new & appropriate Chispological Adventure. Well, I thought, lets do Atlantis. There’s no rush, its only February, but I definitely have enough material for a survey which begins with a Chispology chapter I published a couple of years ago concerning the Aryan Invasion, the essence of which saw the following two facts;
1: The culmination on my studies into the origins of Zeus, proving he was in fact a mortal king of the Hyksos. I wrote;
Essentially the Greek god Zeus was also a Hyksos pharaoh call’d Seuserenre Khyan & another historical figure called Sesostris. Where Seuserenre was known as the ‘Embracer of Regions’ Zeus was consider’d to be the, ‘King of the Entire World,’ while Sesostris was also said to have conquered the world; where Zeus attack’d the Titans in Thrace, so Sesostris led armies in the same region; where Seuserenre was succeeded by Apepi, Zeus had a son called Epaphus/Apis. With the babel-chain of Zeus-Seus-Ses adding more support to the case
2: The Hyksos were the force behind the Aryan Invasions of India. I got an interesting comment appertaining to this point, which stated;
The Hyksos as RigVedic gods is detailed by Dr. Liny Srinivasan in her four English books, Dezi language speaks of the past, FromCrete to Egypt, Near Easter Deities in the Rig Veda and Her book on Mandean and Biblical names in Egyptian Coffin texts. She also is. mentioned in Cyrus Gordon’s Ugaritic textbooksnd published with him on this subject. She puts the linguistic and geographical clues together (she is a phd geographer) and her analysis supports much of what you wrote.
So, it seems, I’m on the right track somewhere! I definitely lean towards the euhemeristic approach to history, I’ve had too many hits not to. But the ideal place of study is somewhere in the middle as opposed to what Palaephatus opined, in the preface to his On Incredible Tales; ‘some men, from want of instruction, believe all the current narratives, while others, more searching & cautious, disbelieve them altogether.’ Through my studies I have identified that myths are more often founded on truth but heavily embossed with extra-analogical features – it takes some pretty skillful chispology to disconnect the two… & with Atlantis its gonna take an incredible amount of untangling!
IN THE TIME OF CRONOS
We begin our search for Atlantis with a passage in Plutarch’s, ‘On the Face appearing in the Orb Of the Moon‘ which describes contact between North America & Europe.
The great mainland, by which the great ocean is encircled, while not so far from the other islands, is about five thousand stades from Ogygia, the voyage being made by oar, for the main is slow to traverse and muddy as a result of the multitude of streams. The streams are discharged by the great land-mass and produce alluvial deposits, thus giving density and earthiness to the sea, which has been thought actually to be congealed. On the coast of the mainland Greeks dwell about a gulf which is not smaller than the Maeotis and the mouth of which lies roughly on the same parallel as the mouth of the Caspian sea. These people consider and call themselves continentals and the inhabitants of this land because the sea flows around it on all sides; and they believe that with the peoples of Cronus there mingled at a later time those who arrived in the train of Heracles and were left behind by him and that these latter so to speak rekindled again to a strong, high flame the Hellenic spark there which was already being quenched and overcome by the tongue, the laws, and the manners of the barbarians. Therefore Heracles has the highest honours and Cronus the second.
The key passage here reads, ‘with the peoples of Cronus there mingled at a later time those who arrived in the train of Heracles. In my Aryan Invasion post I established the presence of Heracles in the Hyksos royal family, several generations after Zeus. if we now focus on Cronos & allow him to be real, then he would have been the father of Seuserenre. According to Egyptology, the previous king to Seuserenre was a certain Sakir-Har, mentioned on an excavated doorjamb from Tell el-Dab’a, which reads;
[Horus who… …], The possessor of the Wadjet and Nekhbet diadems who subdues the bow people. The Golden Falcon who establishes his boundary. The heka-khawaset, Sakir-Har.
It is interesting to see the KR of Kronos/Cronos embedded in Sakir, & also the name of Zeus’ mother, Rhea, in the ‘r-har’ ending. Whether Sakir-Har is Kronos or not, the euhemeristic father of Zeus would have been active c.1600 BC. That Cronos was living then means this era would be remembered as the Greek ‘Golden Age’ celebrated since at least Hesiod. In this age of peace & harmony, humans were said to live among the gods, and freely mingled with them, a metaphor one would expects when mortals liked Seuserenre was ruling the world.
By tying what we know about Zeus & his supposed father, to Plutarch’s ‘Orb of the Moon‘ account, we come to a natural conclusion that a first wave of immigrant Greeks had settled in the New World c.1600 BC – a whole three thousand years befor Colombus. This leads us quite neatly to the…
The first major civilization of Mesoamerica, the “mother culture” of the Mayans & the Aztec, were known as the Olmeks. Historians have remarked on how a complete & quite sophisticated civilization of artists, engineers & astronomers just seemed to spring up out of nowhere. From deposits at the El Manati shrine (near San Lorenzo) the earliest date for the Olmeks has been given as 1600 BC. That very narrow time-band fits perfectly to a group of Hyksosean colonists pitching up in the New World. Case solved, but lets see if it’ll stand up in court.
As seen from the image above, the Olmecs reflected truly global influences, which makes them being a part of a Hyksos empire a sound prospect. In his book Exodus Lost Stephen Compton identified a Hyksos colony in Mesoamerica. Comparing contemporaneous art & architecture, he tells us ‘all of these features exist(ed) among the Hyksos before they suddenly appeared at San Lorenzo.’ Compton also highlights Tlillan-Tlapallan – “the land of black and red, of wisdom” – & shows it as a literal translation of the ancient Egyptian name for Egypt, Kemet Deshret.
The Olmecs built the first pyramid in America, reflecting their Egyptian origins. A joint expedition of Russian and Uzbek archaeologists has discovered several ancient pyramids in Uzbekistan. According to the scientists, these 15-metre high constructions may be at least 2,700 years old & have a flat surface, resembling those found in Central America. These pyramids, then are leaves of the same anthrotree, whose root lies in Hyksosean Egypt, & whose branches spread across the Atlantic & into India c.1600 BC.
There is even epigraphical evidence, of sorts. The inheritors to the Olmec hegemony in Mexico, the Aztecs, have a foundation tale which places their original homelands were a place called Chicomoztoc, from which play they & six other tribes settled “near” a place, a pardise island in a lake, called Aztlán. This is an obvious match for the Atlantis of Plato, which we’ll look deeper into next post, but for now lets simply record the name Chicomoztoca, which means ‘place of the seven caves’ in Nahuatl, the language of the early Aztecs.
According to the Codex Aubin, the Aztecs were subject to a tyrannical elite called the Azteca Chicomoztoca. Now, where everyone else believes the myth, a trained chispologist sees something else in the name, & I’ll just show you exactly what with a babel-chain. To all extents & purposes you’re simply changing the ‘m’ phonetic to a ‘kh.’
In 1600 BC the Hyksos were the defacto controllers of the Mediterranean. Archeology tells us that at the time Seuserenre Khyan, our Hyksos emporer, was sending gifts to brother kings, including one to the Minoan leadership at Knossos on Crete. This gives us a definitive cultural link to the Minoaon script, Linear A, & it now seems evident why it shares so many similarities to that of the Olmecs.
Those very visible tallies cannot easily ignored, & should open up fresh investigations into the Hykso-Minoan relations, perhaps even finding the language of Linear A is related somehow to a Mesoamerican language.
If we see Scythia is the homelands & main trunk of the Hyksos anthrotree, & India being one of its branches, then if the Olmec civilisation is another branch, that civilization should share some of the same cultural foliage. Yoga is a clear tally, as recorded on numeorus Olmec figurines & statues, as a simple peruse of the asanas below will show.
MORE OLMEC-HINDU LINKS
The Olmecs established in Mesoamerica the ritual use of conch-shell trumpets to announce the presence of the gods – a practice still followed in Hindu and Buddhist religious ceremonies. The Olmeks also had a diety with an elephant’s head which tallies with the famous Ganesh of India, & also some of the earliest depictions of the Egyptian god, Horus. There is an Egyptian relief, for example, which shows Apap swallowing the water & the light of the world, & Horus – depicted as ane elephant god – fighting him to make him disgorge what he had swallowed.
At the Museum of Anthropology in Jalapa, Mexico, one can see an Olmec altar supported by a pair of dwarves with upraised hands. In India, on both Hindu & Buddhist temples, these dwarf figures called “ganas.” There is also a similar dwarf icon in ancient Egypt known as Bes, the protector of the household and of childbirth. He is depicted below a cornice at the Denderah Temple complex, which suggests that he played a similar function of supporting the temple in Egypt.
There is also a depiction of the Hindu-Buddhist Kalamukha, a monster face which hangs over shrines & temples, with foliage being sculptured either side of the entrance. The lower jaw of the monster is absent, which creates the impression of being devoured by the Kalamukha as one enters.
NAHUATL & SANSKRIT
Since the 1900s, Mexican scholars have noted that the Nahuatl language is derived from Sanskrit. Even the word Nahua derives from the Sanskrit word for “sailor:” Nava or Navaja. I’ll just give you a few extracts from the excellevt essat ‘On Nahuatl & Sanskrit’ by Juan Miguel de Mor.
One of those intellectuals, the foremost in this regard, established interest-ing comparisons between Sanskrit and the language spoken througout the Aztec Empire before the arrival of the Spanish conquerors and which is still spoken in various parts of Mexico : Nahuatl. This student of the language of Kãlidãsa was Doctor Gumersindo Mendoza… and in 1878 published his Estudio Comparativo entre el Sánscrito y el Náguatl (Comparative study between Sanskrit and Nahuatl ) in Mexico – In eight tables or charts, Mendoza compares one hundred and seventeen Sanskrit words with an equal number of words in Nahuatl… Mendoza states in his study – suffices to be able to see clealy that the two languages recognize the same basis the same stem of the human species : the first – he refers to Sanskrit – carried to the highest degree of perfection from time immemorial; the second, when the conquerors reached this land, was still in a state called by philologists the state of agglutination or that of semi-flexion.
Mendoza begins with ap which, according to Monier-Williams, Benfey, Renou, Stchoupak and others, means ” water, air, waters personified ” in Sanskrit and which lie compares with the Nahuatl a pantli which is ” current, canal, irrigation channel Similarly apano is, in Nahuatl, •« to cross a current of water “,
Kuharat in Sanskrit, is the name of a serpent. It is compared by Mendoza to koatl or kohuatl , ” snake ” in Nahua
Ikshana, “a look, view, aspect, sight” (MW) in Sanskrit ; ixco-ixtth 11 face, countenance, by extent ion : eye ” i
Mekala , the name of the river Narma-dã ( Nerbudda ) in India, is compared to Mexcala , the Nahuatl name of a river in the state of Guerrero in Mexico
Makha, ” a sacrifice, sacrificial oblation ” ( MW ) ; tlamacazki ” priest, minister of the cult, from the root maka ” in Nah
Toya, ” water ” ( MW ) in Sanskrit ; toyaua , ” to spill, the spreading of water ” in Nahuatl.
THE NAME OF MEXICO
So we’re off. Atlantis is out there somewhere & its connections with the New World are evident. Before we move on I would just like to show what I believe to be the very first ever mention of Mexico, 2000 years before the panish conquistadors besieged the Aztec capital, México-Tenochtitlan, in 1521. Before then no-one really knows its origin, although the Codex Aubin says that after leaving Aztlan, on the road their god Huitzilopochtli forbade them to call themselves Azteca, telling them that they should be known as Mexica. Reading the myth with a chispological eye indicates that the Aztecs were simply moving to Mexico where they would have to be called, well, Mexicans.
In the Asiatic Society Researches, Volume 11, published in 1808, Major F. Wilford states in his paper ‘An Essay on the Sacred Isles in the West’, “….various etymologies are given of the name of the city of Mexico, the true pronunciation of which is Machico.’ This leads us to Claudius Aelianus, or Aelian, who about 200 AD related a discourse recorded six centuries earlier by Theopompus, between Midas the Phrygian, and Silenus. It reads;
Amongst other things, Silenus told Midas that Europe, Asia and Africk were Islands surrounded by the Ocean : That there was but one Continent onely, which was beyond this world, and that as to magnitude it was infinite : That in it were bred, besides other very great Creatures, Men twice as big as those here, and they lived double our age : That many great Cities are there, and peculiar manners of life ; and that they have Laws wholly different from those amongst us : That there are two Cities farre greater then the rest, nothing to like each other ; one named Machimus, Warlike, the other Eusebes, Pious : That the Pious people live in peace, abounding in wealth, & reap the fruits of the Earth without Ploughs or Oxen, having no need of tillage or sowing. They live, as he said, free from sickness, and die laughing, and with great pleasure : They are so exactly Just, that the Gods many times vouchsafe to converse with them. The Inhabitants of the City Machimus are very Warlike, continually armed and fighting : They subdue their Neighbours, and this one City predominates over many. The Inhabitants are not fewer then two hundred Myriads : they die sometimes of sickness, but this happens very rarely, for most commonly they are kill’d in the Wars by Stones or Wood, for they are invulnerable by Steel. They have vast plenty of Gold and Silver, insomuch that Gold is of less value with them then Iron with us.
So one simply has to ask oneself, does the 4th century BC city of Machimus anything to do with Machico? The Olmek were definitely still a prominent force in that period. That they were ‘very Warlike, continually armed and fighting : They subdue their Neighbours, and this one City predominates over many,’ finds a tally in Olmec art. In the book ‘The Olmec World,’ Ignacio Bernal writes, ‘on Altar 4 of La Venta a human figure bound by a cord suggests a captive. Monument C at Tres Zapotes shows scenes of war & combat. A trophy head is probably represented on Stela A from Tres Zapotes & on Stela D a kneeling figure also suggests that he is a victim of conquest.’ The representation of an obsidian-edged sword would indicate the same, while from stelae A & D of Tres Zapotes we know that the Olmecs possessed lances & knives. For me Machico & Machimus are the same…
THE CHISPOLOGIST’S GUIDE TO ATLANTIS
Chapter 1: The Exodus
Chapter 2: The Aryan Invasion
Chapter 3: The Mahabharata
Chapter 4: Agastya
Chapter 5: The Picts
Chapter 6: Brunanburh
Chapter 7: The Young Shakespeare
Chapter 8: Shakespeare’s Blossom
Chapter 9: The Badon Babel Tree
Chapter 10: The Saxon Advent
THE CHISPER EFFECT
Chapter 1: Chispology
Chapter 2: Princess Scota
Chapter 3: The Ithica Frage
Chapter 4: The Jesus Jigsaw
Chapter 5: Asvaghosha
Chapter 6: Dux Bellorum
Chapter 7: Dux Pictorum
Chapter 8: The Holy Grail
Chapter 9: The Mandylion
Chapter 10: Shakespeare’s Grand Tour
Chapter 11: The Dark Lady
Chapter 12: The Ripper Gang