"Bloodline of the Grail"

[I, Brian]

"Bloodline of the Grail" - now there's a subject to get my wick burning! And rather than distract to it on it in another thread, I thought I'd bring it up here.

Anyway, it's a terrible example of how someone can rewrite history, simply using a couple of simple history books and fill in the gaps with whatever comes into their head.

Bloodline, as a work of fiction, would be interesting - but as a work of "scholarship" it's nothing of the sort. The person only references three other sources when commenting upon Jesus (the foundation for the book) - and one of these is the Bible! That should be an indication of precisely how carefully the author had researched the whole thing.

I had to stop when the Dark Ages was reached. I was already researching the period and could see he was blatantly inventing periods of time between historically recorded instances - and then skewing those instances as it was. It wa a commerical novel, and I sincerely doubt there were any decent motivations behind writing it.

But that's simply my own opinion - feel free to disagree.

[WiccanWade]

"Well...", in his best Samantha Steves impression, "why I believe it simply cannot be so bad, is simply because of the author whom recommended it, who really knows her stuff, and is very thorough in her research, so I find it incredibly diffidult to concieve that she might recommend anything which is historical garbage. Heck, she's also a knbown Medium, and can glean direct communication via her Spirit Guide, Francine, so...you'd think she'd know a great deal of history, right there. Although, like her, I also seek validation. Heck, I was able, while giving a dear friend a psychic reading, to discover her own spirit guide's name. It happened to be Josephine. Although, also, during the reading, the name of a friend of her's, whom I did not know (he had never meantioned her name, nor had I met any friend of hers by this name, and she hadn't seen hjer in several years). So, I just blurt out the name "Nancy". And, about 5 minutes later, a white car pulls into her driveway, and she was so exited to see her that she forgets to introduce us, and it was, in fact, Nancy!" ;-) But, I'm rammbling, right now...

[I, Brian]

Well, everyone has preferences for different things.

Sometimes I can try and appear like an educated and cultured sort of person (!!) - but I much prefer fried egg and chips (fries) to any delicate continental cuisine.

History, though - that get's my goat up. History - like the sciences - is filled with mysteries and unanswered questions. That's why any source that tries to invent sweeping answers in its own history, and pass it off as "fact", I'm likely to find somewhat annoying. And like I said, anyone who writes about a historical Jesus but can only cite 3 sources to justify their interpretations is obviously showing very limited scholarship.

[WHKeith]

I must join Brian on this one. "Bloodline" was what I was referring to when I made some disparaging comments in an earlier post about recent books and Merovingian bloodlines. This guy is the Eric van Daaniken of pseudohistory.

He's also a good example of what I was talking about in that post--authors who FIRST develop a thesis--usually something shocking or contentious--then look everywhere for ANYTHING to back that thesis up, while simultaneously ignoring anything that does not advance their case. That is not historical scholarship. It is prostitution.

Saw a similar one out recently: 1467: The Year the Chinese Discovered America. (I may have the year wrong, but it was the mid 15th century.) That was written on a topic I have considerable interest in, one which includes a genuine historical mystery of which I have some personal knowledge--the presence of numerous mysterious stone structures in New England and elsewhere that were not built by Native Americans, and which could be evidence of pre-Columbian Old World contact.

The guy starts with a decent premise and some fair research, discussing the sea-faring accomplishments of Ming-dynasty China. (That's 1368 to 1644, or thereabouts.) Seventy years before Columbus set sail in three tiny caravels, these folks assembled fleets of hundreds of ships--some with three and four decks and three masts--with thousands of people, and sailed as far as the Red Sea and Madagascar. One of the great what-ifs of history: the Chinese came THAT close to discovering Europe, well before Europe discovered the Americas!

There is convincing evidence that the Chinese reached the Americas as well. There is a Chinese record from the period mentioning a land far to the east which describes a particular type of unusual tree . . . which is a very good description of a real tree found only in Central America.

So far, so good. The author is following several well-researched threads here. But he then hares off in a wild direction, proceeding to describe a west-to-east circumnavigation of the Earth by a Chinese fleet that sends off splinter groups along the way, thereby "solving" everything from Asian-looking statues in Central America to mysterious standing stone circles in New England.

One example. There is a stone tower in Providence, Rhode Island, purportedly a grain mill built by Benedict Arnold's father, but which local tradition asserts is actually Norse, from the Vinland days. There is excellent evidence suggesting that the Arnold claim is a historical distortion, and that the tower really is Norse. The book on the Chinese fleet mentions that the measurements of that tower work out perfectly to Chinese measurement standards, a "Chinese inch," if you will. That may be, but the measurements of the tower ALSO exactly match Norse measurement standards, the "Norse inch." This is well-attested, but the author never mentions this. He simply advances the Chinese inch as "proof" that the tower was built by Ming-era Chinese.

Quite a few recent historical books seem to rely on what I think of as tabloid marketing. Make a flashy, dramatic claim--"ALIEN HAS ELVIS' BABY!"--back it up with a few waves of the hand, some smoke and mirrors, and . . .presto! A new best-seller! Grail is certainly one of these.

For me, the rule of thumb is to go in skeptical. I'm willing to be convinced, but the author has to make a decent and well-supported case. If he has made some incredible discovery of some major conspiracy to rewrite or misrepresent history, the burdon of proof is on him to demonstrate the facts of the matter. It's not enough for him to say, "Hey! The history we have is all bunk, and generations of scholars and researchers either lied to us or got it all wrong! HERE'S what really happened!"

It's true that much of history IS bunk, and much more is supposition based on way too little data. But Occam's Razor dictates that it is EXTREMELY unlikely that one man has suddenly stumbled upon the Truth and revealed it to an ignorant world in a single best-seller. His thesis may be interesting. It may be good reading. It may even be true! But just as the scientific method is the best tool we have for verifying scientific hypothesis, scholarship and solid, attested research is the best tool we have in uncovering the still-shadowed corners of history. Both demand a skeptical approach, rather than breathless enthusiasm.

In my humble opinion!

[WiccanWade]

Originally Posted by WHKeith

That was written on a topic I have considerable interest in, one which includes a genuine historical mystery of which I have some personal knowledge--the presence of numerous mysterious stone structures in New England and elsewhere that were not built by Native Americans, and which could be evidence of pre-Columbian Old World contact.

Ah, yes...I know of America's Stonehendge. It may have, actually, been built by the Celts. In fact, there's legend that one Native American tribe was, actually, Welsh, in origin! Someone told me about it, and I wrote it down, so i could look into it further, but...lost the sticky note. Anyway, one of Berry Fell's collegues, Gloria what's-her-name (it escapes me, now) has found Ogham inscriptions in the U.S., as well as inscriptions to Epona, which even depict a woman sitting atop a horse.

[WHKeith]

Yup. One of my favorite fringe-science topics. The idea is way outside the mainstream scientific/historical view right now, but there is a LOT of evidence of Celtic, pre-Celtic, Iberian, Carthaginian, Roman, and other contact with North America, going back as far as 2000 BCE.

As it happens, I live about an hour from America's Stonehenge--originally "Mystery Hill," and have been there several times. (Our coven, which has a Celtic-eclectic flavor, has held ritual there on several occasions.) The place is awesome, in the original and literal sense of the word.

As a distinct people, the Celts only go back to about 600 BCE, and many mistakenly blame them for stone circles such as Stonehenge. But SOMEONE was evidently building monolithic structures in both the old world and the new. Many of the walls and chambers at Mystery Hill (located at North Salem, New Hampshire) look distinctly like the monolithic walls at Malta, and the layout of the place appears to provide sighting points for numerous astronomical phenomenon, including the solstices and the 19-year Lunar cycle, just as Stonehenge does.

My favorite set of ogham inscriptions was found in Vermont, I believe, and can be translated as an inscription to the sun god Bel (related to the Semetic Ba'al mentioned so prominently in the Old Testament.) Next to it an eye is carved into the stone--a symbol of Bel.

For that matter, less than thirty miles from where I sit, off the coast of Wells, Maine, is an inscription carved in rock--a quote from Virgil: "There is a foam-decked rock far out to sea opposite the shore which is covered by the waves in rough weather." The Latin script matches European samples from the 4th or 5th century CE, and appears to be a reference to Boon Island, a reef six miles off shore now marked by a ligthhouse. On Manana Island, right next to Monhegan off the Maine coast further north, is another inscription which appoears to be Phoenician. It reads "Ships of Tarshish dock here." (Tarshish, mentioned in the Bible, is probably Tartessos, a vanished city in Spain near Cadiz and the mouth of the Guadalquivir River.)

"Gloria" is Gloria Farley, an Oklahoma "epigraphic explorer," as she is called in Fell's book "Saga America" (a follow-on to his better-known "America B.C." dealing with linguistic evidence of pre-Columbian European colonization of America.) She's found not only Ogham, but Greek, Latin, Arabic and other inscriptions as well.

Fell remains controversial, but the evidence of extensive trade and colonization across both the Atlantic and the Pacific is impressive and difficult to dismiss.

[WiccanWade]

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Yup. One of my favorite fringe-science topics. The idea is way outside the mainstream scientific/historical view right now, but there is a LOT of evidence of Celtic, pre-Celtic, Iberian, Carthaginian, Roman, and other contact with North America, going back as far as 2000 BCE.

And, I would love to further research this evidence, too! Because, I was harshly lambasted for my views, and what I had heard, by other pagans, with regards for evidence that the Celts, et al. were ever in America, asserting that my views were laughible (your basic more-pagan-than-though types *sigh). These pagans, of whom I speak, were utterly ruthless. Just as bad as those others whom I told ya' about. Oh...and, the reason why those pagans I'd encountered On-Linbe (who said, "Next time, we'll just have to try harder) had such an effect in me, was because they were the FIRST pagans I'd ever been introduced to! So, naturally, it had a greater impact. So, I just a break from speaking toi any pagans on-line, and thankfully found some great, and kind, pagans just a few months thereafter.

Originally Posted by WHKeith

As it happens, I live about an hour from America's Stonehenge--originally "Mystery Hill," and have been there several times. (Our coven, which has a Celtic-eclectic flavor, has held ritual there on several occasions.) The place is awesome, in the original and literal sense of the word.

Oh...I'm so jealous! Look at me! I'm just green with envy! Heh heh heh...

Originally Posted by WHKeith

As a distinct people, the Celts only go back to about 600 BCE, and many mistakenly blame them for stone circles such as Stonehenge. But SOMEONE was evidently building monolithic structures in both the old world and the new.

Exactly! Although, I am not entirely convinced that thew Celts did not use these pre-Celtic structures. They may have, in fact!

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Many of the walls and chambers at Mystery Hill (located at North Salem, New Hampshire) look distinctly like the monolithic walls at Malta, and the layout of the place appears to provide sighting points for numerous astronomical phenomenon, including the solstices and the 19-year Lunar cycle, just as Stonehenge does.

I am not one to disagree with you. And, this is what I told those pagans I'd previously meantioned, who asserted that this was no proof nor acceptible evidence. Their reasoning? Because I was a fool to think that the Native Americans never observed the "traditional" 8 Celtic feastivals (sic.) *Grrr!!!* Some people! *tosses his hair dismissively!* However, I was once told, actually, that the Celts having ben in America may be why Native American shamanism/spirituality may be why the Native Americans may so closely mirror the Celts! Sorry for venting, there.

Originally Posted by WHKeith

My favorite set of ogham inscriptions was found in Vermont, I believe, and can be translated as an inscription to the sun god Bel (related to the Semetic Ba'al mentioned so prominently in the Old Testament.) Next to it an eye is carved into the stone--a symbol of Bel.

Oh, absolutely! And, I would love to see these inscriptions, one day.

I was surfing the Mystery Hill site, one day, and found a photo ofan inscription, which hey labled as "the eyes of the Goddess". So, simply out of curiousity, I wroyte them about it, asking how this was known, or how they cameto this conclusioin, and they never answered me.

Originally Posted by WHKeith

For that matter, less than thirty miles from where I sit, off the coast of Wells, Maine, is an inscription carved in rock--a quote from Virgil: "There is a foam-decked rock far out to sea opposite the shore which is covered by the waves in rough weather." The Latin script matches European samples from the 4th or 5th century CE, and appears to be a reference to Boon Island, a reef six miles off shore now marked by a ligthhouse. On Manana Island, right next to Monhegan off the Maine coast further north, is another inscription which appoears to be Phoenician. It reads "Ships of Tarshish dock here." (Tarshish, mentioned in the Bible, is probably Tartessos, a vanished city in Spain near Cadiz and the mouth of the Guadalquivir River.)

How lovely! How do you know what their translations are? Which books?

And, of course, we also know that the Celts were in Spain, as well! From one of the maps included in scholar Miranda Greens' books.

Originally Posted by WHKeith

"Gloria" is Gloria Farley, an Oklahoma "epigraphic explorer," as she is called in Fell's book "Saga America" (a follow-on to his better-known "America B.C." dealing with linguistic evidence of pre-Columbian European colonization of America.) She's found not only Ogham, but Greek, Latin, Arabic and other inscriptions as well.

Ah...that's her name!

OH! And, another problem those pagans had was that Fell had no degree in the topic he was speaking of! It had something to do with marine life, or something like that, I think! Well...if that really met the burdon of proof, then...Einstein would never be as well respected as he is! Because, as a physicist, physics is a science based in math, failed Math in school! But, I was so taken aback by their cruelty, that I could not get my thoughts about me. In fact, they treated me so cruely, that they even mocked me because of my spelling! How aweful, and truly shameful! Seriously, they ought to be a shamed of themselves!!!

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Fell remains controversial, but the evidence of extensive trade and colonization across both the Atlantic and the Pacific is impressive and difficult to dismiss.

Tell that to the pagans who were so cruel to me! LOL...

[Gordy]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

"Bloodline of the Grail" - now there's a subject to get my wick burning! And rather than distract to it on it in another thread, I thought I'd bring it up here.

Anyway, it's a terrible example of how someone can rewrite history, simply using a couple of simple history books and fill in the gaps with whatever comes into their head.

I'd have to agree with you there. I read that a while back and was unimpressed by the leaps they made from conjecture to so-called proof.

Then again, there is a school of thought that says The New Testament is written in a similar manner, being as it is St Paul's particular version of events, written to impress the Romans. Certainly things like the Dead Sea Scrolls record a slightly different - and less 'mystic' - story to the one St Paul describes.

It is a trivial thing for an author to make their own interpretation appear like some sort of de facto truth, which is as good an argument as any for finding ones own way in religious matters.

[I, Brian]

Hi Gordy, and welcome to comparative-religion.com!

Certainly there are different angles on the events of the 1st century AD in Judea. It really is the bane of history that so much or the recorded written word recovered is often factionalised, dogmatised, and roundly politicised.

I never realised just how much this is the case, until I read Norwich's history of Byzantium - throughout all three volumes Norwich himself sometimes seems to stop and bewail the conflicting versions of events.

How would a future historian interpret US politics in the 20th century, if all he had to go on were a few party manifestos from various decades? That's something of the situation in history.

Even ancient historians are guilty of bias - Livy is always nostalgic about the Roman Republic, and that very much shapes his works. Suetonious, on the other hand, includes everything he hears about the Caesars, in his monumental work - which has led too much to be inferred by his comments. For example, a lot of what is accepted about Caligula, has been nicely argued as political parody, rather than literal history.

Whoops - nearly off topic.

[Gordy]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Hi Gordy, and welcome to comparative-religion.com!

Thanks for the welcome!

Livy is always nostalgic about the Roman Republic, and that very much shapes his works.

'War With Hannibal' is an excellent read, if a bit preoccupied with military tactics. Sort of a cross between a novel, a history book and a Sandhurst study text!

[WiccanWade]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Certainly there are different angles on the events of the 1st century AD in Judea.

Just a quick note, heh heh heh... But, AD and BC are now only rarely used (usually by those of the Christian faith to denote a time which is "Before Christ". And, A.D. is similarly used by them to refer to "Anno Domini", which means "In the year of our Lord." So, because of those, they have mostly ben replaced by B.C.E. [Before Common Era] and C.E. [Common Era]. ;-)

And, I've always really thought it to be interesting that the term for "Lord" comes from Adonai, or some such (I'd have to look it up to feel 100% accurate on my spelling, there), which is clearly a derivation of Adonis, a vegitation, or yearly dying Lord*. And, I would like to research, also, the references to all the various pagan deities within the Bible. Such as:

In Assyria, Tiamat was the primeval ocean from whos fertile depth sprang every living thing. (Tohu, the 'waters' of Genesis 1:2, is the Hebrew form of Tiamat.)

The Hebrew Jarah, after whom Jericho is named, was Goddess of the new Moon and Bride of the Sun; Levanah, the Moon of the Song of Solomon, was also Chaldaean; and another Chaldaean Moon Goddess, Sirdu, the wife of the Sun God Shamash-Bubbar, may also have been the bride of the Hebrew God Iao (Yahweh).

(Mount Sinai was named after Sin- the Middle Eastern Moon God, and the Levites were origionally Moon Priests, wearing the lunar crescents as a headdress.)

...Ashera was worshipped in the Temple in Jerusalem, alongside Jehova, as His wife and sister.... And, the Essences, strict followers of the Law whos teachings greatly influenced Jesus, worshipped the Earth Mother and Her angels in polarity with the Heavenly Father and His angels.

...the Biblical flood story is a revision of the Ishtar one. She [Ishtar] inherited it from an earlier Babylonian Moon Goddess, Nuah, whos name, masculinized, is the obvious root of Noah.... Utnapishtim, the equivalent of Noah, had ben advised by the god Ea to build an ark.... According to one version (and the Noah origional), it is the Goddess Herself whom makes and sails the ark, and after the Flood had subsided, 'Then at last Ishtar also came, She lifted Her necklace withthe jewels of Heaven that once Anu had made to please Her: "O ye gods here present, by the lapis lazuli round my neck I shall rmemeber these days as I remember the jewels of my throat; these last days I shall not forget."' - a detail echoed by the rainbow of Genesis ix.

In Genesis 1:2 in the beginning, 'The Earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters.' The word for 'deep' here is 'tehom', and for 'waters' 'tohu', Hebrew forms of Tiamat, the Goddess who personified the primordial from which all things sprang. (The Hebrew word for 'Spirit', incidentally, is also feminine in gender...

Et al... ;-)

* Upon checking a simple fact, I have found that Adoni (not to be confused with Adonis, although His predicessor) is Phonecian for "Lord", and is a dying/vegitation God, as well; and lover of Ashteroth/Astarte (whom later became Aphrodite through Inanna/Ishtar).

[I, Brian]

Hi Gordy

Originally Posted by Gordy

'War With Hannibal' is an excellent read, if a bit preoccupied with military tactics. Sort of a cross between a novel, a history book and a Sandhurst study text!

Yes, that's Polybius, I believe - and he was such a refreshing read after Livy.

What I remember most was the politics, though - especially seeing how the Greeks and Romans interacted - and, not least, the factionalism within Greece. quite eye-opening, really.

But in the Greek sources I actually rate Thucydides as my favourite - his coverage of the Pelopponesian War was very colourful. Xenophon's "March of the 10,000 (or however the title is translated) was also very interesting - the skirmishes in Persia, and soldiers succumbing to frostbite while they crossed the mountains towards port.

But Herodotus...no!...far too much waffle! Reading Herodotus is a big like listening to some drunk bloke down the pub, who insists on telling you everything, without coherence or direction. What's worse is that too much of what I remember reads as second hand rumour and gossip as well. A let down, there.

Never read Plato, though. I thirsted for history.


WiccanWade -

My crikey - that's quite a list! I'm far weaker on the Mesopotamian lore - north of the Mediterranean is where I'm strongest. Adonis is a little weak as a corn-god - try Dionysios instead, as he's much more interesting theologically in that regard! But some of those comments do look very interesting - thanks for that!

[WiccanWade]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

My crikey - that's quite a list! I'm far weaker on the Mesopotamian lore...

Yeah, me too! As I am a Celtic Witch.

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Adonis is a little weak as a corn-god - try Dionysios instead, as he's much more interesting theologically in that regard!

"Well...", in his best Samantha Stevens impression, "it's because of this."

It all started with Tammuz, who is, perhaps, the clearest example of the dying and resurrecting vegitation God. To quote Janet & Stewart Farrar from The Witches' God, "Origionally, up until the beginning of the second millennium BCE, He was the Sumarian Damuzi, beloved of Inanna. As Inanna evolved into the Assyro-Babylonian Ishtar, He became Tammuz. To the Phoenicians He became Adoni (Semetic for 'Lord'), and His Goddess Astarte or Ashtoreth. And, finally, for the Greeks the pair became Adonis and Aphrodite. And, for the Romans, Adonis and Venus." In fact, the myths of Attis parallel those of Damuzi/Tammuz/Adonis. Adonis was also borne of the Myrrh, and...from His blood (upon His death) sprung the anemone, and has connections, also, with lettuce.

Originally Posted by I, Brian

But some of those comments do look very interesting - thanks for that!

Exactly! I've also heard that the word translated as the Holy Spirit is, actually, feminine! Again, several things I'd like to research...

[I, Brian]

That's the thing - with the near east there's so much to learn! And usually it seems to take specific language skills.

As to the corn-god (vegetation god) firgure - it's a widespread theme in mythology - but I'll start a new thread on that topic.

[Gordy]

Originally Posted by WiccanWade

And, I've always really thought it to be interesting that the term for "Lord" comes from Adonai, or some such (I'd have to look it up to feel 100% accurate on my spelling, there), which is clearly a derivation of Adonis, a vegitation, or yearly dying Lord*.

I thought it was 'borrowed' from the Egyptians when Moses made his exodus ... or maybe that was Yaweh. I seem to remember that one of these terms was corruption of the term for the Egyptian war god, although without looking it up I can't remember off hand.