Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

1. Medicine Wheel
2. Serpent Mound
3. Mesa Verde
4. Chaco Canyon
5. Casas Grandes/Paquime
6. Ciudad Perdida “lost city”; Teyuna
7. Ingapirca “Inca”
8. Chavín de Huántar “pre-Inca”
9. Sacred City of Caral-Supe *Caral culture developed between 3000 – 1800 BCE*
10. Machu Picchu
11. Nazca Lines
12. Sacsayhuamán
13. Tiwanaku/Tiahuanaco
14. Atacama Giant/Lines
15. Pucará de Tilcara “pre-Inca”

Eighth Millennium Pottery from a Prehistoric Shell Midden in the Brazilian Amazon

9,000 years ago in the coastal city of Sao Luis, northeastern Brazil: stone tools, ceramic shards, decorated shells, and bones

“The top layer was left by the Tupinamba people, who inhabited the region when European colonizers founded Sao Luis in 1612. Then comes a layer of artifacts typical of Amazon rainforest peoples, followed by a “sambaqui”: a mound of pottery, shells and bones used by some Indigenous groups to build their homes or bury their dead. Beneath that, about 6.5 feet below the surface, lies another layer, left by a group that made rudimentary ceramics and lived around 8,000 to 9,000 years ago, based on the depth of the find. Far older than the oldest documented “pre-sambaqui” settlement found so far in the region, which dates to 6,600 years ago.” ref

Sambaqui (Shell Mound) Societies of Coastal Brazil

“Sambaquis (the Brazilian term for shell mounds, derived from the Tupi language) are widely distributed along the shoreline of Brazil and were noted in European accounts as early as the sixteenth century. They typically occur in highly productive bay and lagoon ecotones where the mingling of salt and fresh waters supports mangrove vegetation and abundant shellfish, fish, and aquatic birds. More than one thousand sambaqui locations are recorded in Brazil’s national register of archaeological sites, but represent a fraction of the original number because colonial through modern settlements coincide with these favorable environments. Although sambaquis are of variable scale overall, massive shell mounds are characteristic of Brazil’s southern coast.” ref

“The term “sambaqui” is applied to cultural deposits of varying size and stratigraphy in which shell is a major constituent, undoubtedly encompassing accumulations with a range of functions and origins. Proportions of soil, sand, shell, and the kinds of cultural inclusions and features in sambaquis also are variable. Small sambaquis often consist of shell layers over sandy substrates or sequences of shell and sand layers, with or without signs of burning or significant numbers of artifacts. Larger shell mounds typically have horizontally and vertically complex stratigraphy, including alternating sequences of shell deposits, narrower and darker layers of charcoal and burned bone that mark occupation surfaces, and clusters of burials, hearths, and postholes descending from these surfaces.” ref

The Chronology and Relationships of the Earliest Ceramic Complexes in the New World, 6000-1500 BCE. by John W Hoopes

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Isthmo-Colombian Area (portions of Central and South America) mainly by Chibchan languages

I am not an academic though I work hard for accuracy and facts, I do this hard work of addressing prehistory and religion as activism (Pro-science and Atheist). I know quite a lot as I started researching the “Evolution of Religion” starting in 2006.

Ciudad Perdida “lost city”; Teyuna

“Tairona or Tayrona was a Pre-Columbian culture of Colombia, which consisted in a group of chiefdoms in the region of Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta in present-day Cesar, Magdalena, and La Guajira Departments of Colombia, South America, which goes back at least to the 1st century CE and had significant demographic growth around the 11th century. The Tairona people formed one of the two principal linguistic groups of the Chibchan family, the other being the Muisca. Genetic and archaeological evidence shows a relatively dense occupation of the region by at least 200 BCE. Pollen data shows considerable deforestation and the use of cultigens such as yuca and maize since possibly 1200 BCE. However, occupation of the Colombian Caribbean coast by sedentary or semi-sedentary populations has been documented to have occurred by c. 4000 BCE. Etymological similarities of the word Tairona survive in the four main linguistic groups of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta: in Sanca Language it is pronounced Teiruna, in Kankuamo language Teijua or Tairuna, and in Ijka, Teruna, meaning “Males” or “sons of the Jaguar.” ref

“One of the best-known Tairona nucleated villages and archaeological sites is known as Ciudad Perdida (Spanish for “Lost City”). It was a major city, about 13 hectares (32 acres) in the “core”. Recent studies suggest that it was inhabited by approximately 1,600 to 2,400 people that lived in at least 11,700 square meters (124,000 square feet) of roofed space, in about 184 round houses built on top of terraces paved with stone. There are many other sites of similar or greater size. A larger site, Pueblito, is located near the coast. According to Reichel-Dolmatoff‘s research, it contains at least 254 terraces and had a population of about 3,000 people. Archaeological studies in the area show that even larger nucleated villages existed towards the western slope of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, like Posiguieca and Ciudad Antigua.” ref

“Smaller villages and hamlets were part of a very robust exchange network of specialized communities, connected with stone-paved paths. Villages that specialized in salt production and fishing, like Chengue in the Parque Tairona, are evidence of a robust Tairona political economy based on specialized staple production. Chengue contains at least 100 terraces and was inhabited by about 800 to 1,000 people in 15 hectares by 1400. The Tairona are known to have built stone terraced platforms, house foundations, stairs, sewers, tombs, and bridges. Use of pottery for utilitarian and ornamental or ceremonial purposes was also highly developed as a result of fairly specialized communities.” ref

Mound cultures are some of the most amazing things in North America and so-called “Americans” don’t care, think it’s Aliens, or believe some mythical white people from the minds of bigots. All Americans should have to learn about Indigenous American history.

“Many pre-Columbian cultures in North America were collectively termed “Mound Builders” ref

Bleera Kaanu-Shell Mound Nicaragua 5,900 years ago human-made shell mound

Watson Brake Louisiana 5,500 years ago human-made mounds

Caral culture 5,000 years ago pyramids, large earthwork platform mounds, and sunken circular plazas

“Archaeological evidence suggests use of textile technology and, possibly, the worship of common deity symbols, both of which recur in pre-Columbian Andean cultures. A sophisticated government is presumed to have been required to manage the ancient Caral.” ref, ref

“The alternative name, Caral–Supe, is derived from the city of Caral in the Supe Valley, a large and well-studied Caral–Supe civilization site. Complex society in the Caral–Supe arose a millennium after Sumer in Mesopotamia, was contemporaneous with the Egyptian pyramids, and predated the Mesoamerican Olmec by nearly two millennia. In archaeological nomenclature, Caral–Supe is a pre-ceramic culture of the pre-Columbian Late Archaic; it completely lacked ceramics and no evidence of visual art has survived. The most impressive achievement of the civilization was its monumental architecture, including large earthwork platform mounds and sunken circular plazas.” ref

Poverty Point  Louisiana 3,700 years ago human-made mounds 

Olmec La Venta Great pyramid 2,394 years ago human-made earth and clay mound

“Olmecs can be divided into the Early Formative (1800-900 BCE), Middle Formative (900-400 BCE), and Late Formative (400 BCE-200 CE). Olmecs are known as the “mother culture” of Mesoamerica, meaning that the Olmec civilization was the first culture that spread and influenced Mesoamerica. The spread of Olmec culture eventually led to cultural features found throughout all Mesoamerican societies. Rising from the sedentary agriculturalists of the Gulf Lowlands as early as 1600 BCE in the Early Formative period, the Olmecs held sway in the Olmec heartland, an area on the southern Gulf of Mexico coastal plain, in Veracruz and Tabasco. Prior to the site of La Venta, the first Olmec site of San Lorenzo dominated the modern day state of Veracruz (1200-900 BCE).” ref

“Unlike later Maya or Aztec cities, La Venta was built from earth and clay—there was little locally abundant stone for the construction. Large basalt stones were brought in from the Tuxtla Mountains, but these were used nearly exclusively for monuments including the colossal heads, the “altars” (actually thrones), and various stelae. For example, the basalt columns that surround Complex A were quarried from Punta Roca Partida, on the Gulf coast north of the San Andres Tuxtla volcano. “Little more than half of the ancient city survived modern disturbances enough to map accurately.” Today, the entire southern end of the site is covered by a petroleum refinery and has been largely demolished, making excavations difficult or impossible. Many of the site’s monuments are now on display in the archaeological museum and park in the city of Villahermosa, Tabasco.” ref

“Complex C, “The Great Pyramid,” is the central building in the city layout, is constructed almost entirely out of clay, and is visible from a distance. The structure is built on top of a closed-in platform—this is where Blom and La Farge discovered Altars 2 and 3, thereby discovering La Venta and the Olmec civilization. A carbon sample from a burned area of the Structure C-1’s surface resulted in the date of 394 ± 30 BCE.” ref

“One of the earliest pyramids known in Mesoamerica, the Great Pyramid is 110 ft (34 m) high and contains an estimated 100,000 cubic meters of earth fill. The current conical shape of the pyramid was once thought to represent nearby volcanoes or mountains, but recent work by Rebecca Gonzalez Lauck has shown that the pyramid was in fact a rectangular pyramid with stepped sides and inset corners, and the current shape is most likely due to 2,500 years of erosion. The pyramid itself has never been excavated, but a magnetometer survey in 1967 found an anomaly high on the south side of the pyramid. Speculation ranges from a section of burned clay to a cache of buried offerings to a tomb.” ref

“Complex A is a mound and plaza group located just to the north of the Great Pyramid (Complex C). The centerline of Complex A originally oriented to Polaris (true north) which indicates the Olmec had some knowledge of astronomy. Surrounded by a series of basalt columns, which likely restricted access to the elite, it was erected in a period of four construction phases that span over four centuries (1000 – 600 BCE). Beneath the mounds and plazas were found a vast array of offerings and other buried objects, more than 50 separate caches by one count, including buried jade, polished mirrors made of iron-ores, and five large “Massive Offerings” of serpentine blocks. It is estimated that Massive Offering 3 contains 50 tons of carefully finished serpentine blocks, covered by 4,000 tons of clay fill.” ref

“Also unearthed in Complex A were three rectangular mosaics (also known as “Pavements”) each roughly 4.5 by 6 metres (15 by 20 feet) and each consisting of up to 485 blocks of serpentine. These blocks were arranged horizontally to form what has been variously interpreted as an ornate Olmec bar-and-four-dots motif, the Olmec Dragon, a very abstract jaguar mask, a cosmogram, or a symbolic map of La Venta and environs. Not intended for display, soon after completion these pavements were covered over with colored clay and then many feet of earth.” ref

“Five formal tombs were discovered within Complex A, one with a sandstone sarcophagus carved with what seemed to be an crocodilian earth monster. Diehl states that these tombs “are so elaborate and so integrated to the architecture that it seems clear that Complex A really was a mortuary complex dedicated to the spirits of deceased rulers.” ref

Maya 3,000 years ago mounds, raised platforms, pyramids

“The Maya are a people of southern Mexico and northern Central America (Guatemala, Belize, western Honduras, and El Salvador) (1000 BCE, approximately 3,000 years ago) they were building pyramidal-plaza ceremonial architecture. The earliest monuments consisted of simple burial mounds, the precursors to the spectacular stepped pyramids from the Terminal Pre-classic period and beyond. These pyramids relied on intricate carved stone in order to create a stair-stepped design. Many of these structures featured a top platform upon which a smaller dedicatory building was constructed, associated with a particular Maya deity. Maya pyramid-like structures were also erected to serve as a place of interment for powerful rulers. Maya pyramidal structures occur in a great variety of forms and functions, bounded by regional and periodical differences.” ref

“Hopewell mtDNA, showed clear links between Adena culture, and earlier Glacial Kame culture, confirming Hopewell culture as the descendants of Adena culture (circa 800 BCE to CE 1) who were, in turn, descended from Archaic cultures (circa 3000-500 BCE).” ref

“The Glacial Kame culture was a culture of Archaic people in North America that occupied southern Ontario, Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana from around 8000 to 1000 BCE. The name of this culture derives from its members’ practice of burying their dead atop glacier-deposited gravel hills. Among the most common types of artifacts found at Glacial Kame sites are shells of marine animals and goods manufactured from a copper ore, known as float copper. Other regional cultures include the Maple Creek Culture of southwestern Ohio, Red Ocher Culture and Old Copper Culture of Wisconsin.” ref

“Glacial Kame culture produced ceramics, as seen in the discovery of basic pottery at the Zimmerman site near Roundhead, Ohio. Excavation of Glacial Kame sites frequently yields few projectile points — some of the most important sites have yielded no projectile points at all — and their few points that have been found are of diverse styles. For this reason, it appears that different groups of Glacial Kame peoples independently developed different methods of manufacturing their projectile points. This diversity appears even in the culture’s heartland in Champaign, Hardin, and Logan counties in western Ohio; one large Logan County site yielded just three points, each of which was significantly different from the other two.” ref

“Glacial Kame Culture, Late Archaic cultural grouping found around Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and southern Ontario in the period c.1500–1000 BCE. Characterized by mortuary rituals which involved interring the dead in natural hills of glacial gravel. Grave goods of copper ornaments and marine shells were sometimes included and attested to long‐distance trade links.” ref

“The Adena “mound-building” culture was a Pre-Columbian Native American culture that existed from 500 BCE to 100 CE, in a time known as the Early Woodland period. The Adena culture refers to what were probably a number of related Native American societies sharing a burial complex and ceremonial system. The Adena culture was centered on the location of the modern state of Ohio, but also extended into contiguous areas of northern Kentucky, eastern Indiana, West Virginia, and parts of extreme western Pennsylvania. The culture is the most prominently known of a number of similar cultures in eastern North America that began mound building ceremonialism at the end of the Archaic period.” ref

Amazonian Earthworks

“More than 1,100 ancient Amazonian earthworks, with over 1,050 geoglyphs and zanjas plus over 50 mound villages documented in both the Excel file and the KML placemarks file linked above. Almost all earthworks are outlined, along with highlighting of 1,000 lines, visible ancient roads and embankments. Hundreds of Geoglyphs Discovered in the Amazon.” ref

“Cahokia Mounds were involved in the largest and most influential urban settlement of the Mississippian culture, which developed advanced societies across much of what is now the Central and the Southeastern United States, beginning more than 1,000 years before European contact.” ref

In response to my art above John Hoopes @KUHoopes Archaeologist said, “Nice! Since you have the Ohio mound groups, you need to start adding the ones in Amazonia. Hundreds of Geoglyphs Discovered in the Amazon“

My response, I was not aware of the Amazonia mounds, thanks. The shell mound erected above the woman’s grave buried in what is now Nicaragua nearly 6,000 years ago. I thought this was cool.

John Hoopes @KUHoopes Archaeologist – “Yes, it is! The revelation of thousands of mounds and ditch-and-embankment structures (unfortunately named “geoglyphs”) is radically changing our understanding of ancient South America.”

My response, I totally agree, great stuff, made by the indigenous, and why I get upset when people like Graham Hancock or Ancient Aliens, say it was someone else.

John Hoopes @KUHoopes Archaeologist – “James Q. Jacobs’ work in Google Earth is amazing. If you don’t know it, you really should check it out.”

My response, I will check it out. Thanks for your help.

John Hoopes @KUHoopes Archaeologist – “Sure thing! Thanks for YOUR help in getting correct and accurate information out to a wide audience!”

My response, I appreciate your support.

John Hoopes (Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas), who Graham Hancock thinks is “the most vehement and insulting of all archaeologists” and I think is great, addresses Pseudoarchaeology, Pseudohistory, and Pseudoscience

Your Shell Mound blog post, “looks good, I did want to make one clarification. The Caddo people don’t see themselves (or their ancestors) as being a “Mississippian” culture. I see on the drawn map that a few sites (particularly Spiro) are shown for “Mississippian cultures”. I assume that is from the H. Roe’s map from 2010. That map was done before Caddo Nation worked with archaeologists to re-classify the social systems/traditions of their ancestors during that time and found that the “Mississippian” label didn’t align with the cultural systems of their ancestors. It is not a big deal but just something to be aware of in the future. I only know because I work with Caddo Nation now and rather knowledge about the latest research of the Caddo.” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

Jeffrey (JT) Lewis is a southeastern archaeologist and Ph.D. Grad Student who makes archaeology YouTube videos

Addressing Things in History

“I’m coming up to a year on Twitter now, and as a fan of ancient history leaning into the fringe, honestly, I thought @Graham Hancock overcooked his whole “archaeology bad” schtick. But the last couple of months have seen the 500,000-year-old wooden platform and the recent Amazon find, and there really are half a dozen Twitter accounts who will not concede one single inch to his conclusions. This is about the HUMAN STORY yet the petty-minded tribalism is astounding.” – thealbedojourney @albedojourney

“Honestly, I think those discoveries are fabulous Just not sure what they have to do with Hancock All of us agree there is more to be found (and both had precedents, at the same site with the wooden structure archaeologists had previously presented human worked wooden materials).” – Flint Dibble @FlintDibble Archaeologist

“The recent Ecuador discovery is cool, but not really seeing how it significantly changes our understanding of Amazon civilization? Seems like that & prior Amazon discoveries are the product of mainstream archeologists over decades of work. Shouldn’t they deserve the credit?” – Tony Trupp @TonyTrupp Tweeting on History, Archeology

“The lead archaeologists say it changes how we see civilization. Agree they should get the credit and don’t see anyone stealing their thunder. Hancock references the archaeological work in America before and doesn’t claim he did the work himself.” – thealbedojourney @albedojourney

“What does either of these add to an out-of-place advanced civilization claim by Hancock? Do we underestimate previous hominid capabilities? Yes, probably but our understanding needs to be evidence-driven. There’s no evidence which can confirm an advanced civilization that can’t fit.” – Karl @KarlHannant

“I know you probably won’t respond to me (because you and @AncientEpoch) just refuse to discuss anything but how does either of those equate to Hancock being right?” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“Come on then Jeffrey, let’s have a discussion… “Right” isn’t a good term to use here, I don’t think.” – thealbedojourney @albedojourney

“Okay, I’ll try to think of a better way to phrase it. Why do Hancock’s theories deserve to be considered based on these two accomplishments by archaeologists?” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“I’ll answer your question with a question of my own, similar to the original tweet — why are you making this about Hancock?” – thealbedojourney @albedojourney

“That doesn’t answer my question at all. I mentioned Hancock because the original tweet you made was about Hancock. Now, why do Hancock’s theories deserve to considered based on these two accomplishment by archaeologists? So many say “Archaeologsists won’t research anything against the narrative!” and then when archaeologists discover something they go “Thanks to Hancock saying they should look into this we now know!” How is it even possible for both of those to be true?” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“I can’t speak for what others say or think, but I’ve never seen Hancock say he found anything alone. I’ve also seen him say, countless times, that his work is made possible by archaeologists. In the end, I’m just fascinated by a major archaeological story. I was moved to write that tweet because other people made it about Hancock. I’m surprised by that way of thinking. I said I couldn’t speak for others. But let’s assume Hancock is the thought leader you suggest, then that is where he is leading he people.” – thealbedojourney @albedojourney

“I agree. Hancock is leading them to not trust archaeologists, even though archaeologists are the ones doing the research and making the discoveries. I can pull a couple of screenshots from his fans to showcase this if need be. I never suggested there wasn’t. I work with amateurs/advocationals all the time – actually have a great relationship with the groups and they invite me to give talks. What “dogma”? People use this term often but often they don’t actually know how diverse people or theories are.” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“I don’t believe that anyone in Archaeology believes that the history is settled. If that was the case, we would all be out of a job. Why would you need archaeologists if we already knew everything about the past? people still using them for racist purposes (not saying everyone is – just stating that I have seen it a few times on here). An historical example would be the “Moundbuilder Myth” that was used to justify removing Indigenous people from their land in eastern North America. the pseudo side of the argument is because in many cases the theories ignore data or misrepresent the data. I don’t get what you mean by the “can’t be disproved” part, so I can’t really comment on that. As to why Hancock is dangerous, I can only share my personal opinion on that. For me, Hancock shares misinformation and lies about archaeologists. He either is a terrible researcher (which if that is the case why does anyone believe him) or he purposefully misrepresents data to make his argument more compelling. I believe if you have a strong theory, it doesn’t require misrepresentation or ignoring data. If you’d like some examples of Hancock doing this, I would be happy to share them.” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“Okay, I’ll address the other two questions first. 1) I am not sure why an archaeologists would do that – I don’t think Hancock is racist. 2): I assume you are referring to Petrie. We actually don’t really talk about him anymore in Archaeology classes because of his views but Archaeology definitely had many racist and colonial theories in it. It’s something we are still battling now (I recently shared a tweet about changing terminology in reports on here). A lot of professional organizations know this & that is why many of them have made statements about the past & why names of awards should be changed to not glorify past archaeologists that promoted racist ideologies. It is usually a major focus of most conference papers.” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

“To share a few times that Hancock has lied or misrepresented data – In AA he discussed how a layer at Gunung Padang dated to 11,600BP but a layer didn’t date to that. Dr. Natawidjaja actually writes that the site would have been vacant/not used during that time. Hancock was a reviewer for Dr. Natawidjaja’s paper, so he had to be aware of this. It also is on the poster that the two are looking at during the episode. I’ll provide a link to the next one because I just wrote about it the other day: link I can give other examples of times he has done it if need be. I believe most now don’t just write them off. It’s a rather popular topic in archaeology. There are thousands of publications on it. The archaeologists that don’t actually get corrected by other archaeologists on social media. Which is why I say Hancock either has to be the absolute worst researcher or he is purposefully lying. Personally, I don’t even classify them as “myths”. In most cases archaeologists refer to them as “oral traditions” – to remove the idea that they aren’t truthful.” – Jeffrey (JT) Lewis @jtlewis_arch Southeastern archaeologist. MA, RPA. PhD Grad Student at OU.

=============================================================================

Addressing Pseudoarchaeology, Pseudohistory, Pseudojournalism, Pseudoscholarship, and Pseudoscience

Archaeology Tube by Dr. Bill Farley addressing Real Archaeology and Pseudoarchaeology as well as Science Communication with the Public

“I’ve got to ask: Why do these conversations always revolve around and stem from Hancock? Dude wrote a bunch of mid-ass books and then got a mid-ass doc on Netflix bc of his nepo-baby exec son. Archs are constantly subtweeted like we’re obsessed, but y’all defend him like he cares. I had dozens, more than 50 at last count, of comments using Graham’s wife as a shield against accusations of racism. Every. Single. One of them misrepresented her ethnicity and/or race. It was really sad. I have no idea if Graham has personal racist views. Some things he’s written could imply that, but that was a long time ago and he may have changed. I can’t see in his head. Also, it genuinely doesn’t matter what he thinks, his actions are what matter.” – Bill Farley @ArchaeologyGame Archaeology Professor

“So many guys on here @ ing Graham and defending him like he’s a Playstation and they’ve just got to prove that “Yes, Sony IS better than Microsoft.” He does not care about you! He’s probably smoking weed on a yacht bought with your money alongside Joe Rogan right now. If he’s not claiming to be a scientist or archaeologist, he should stop pretending to be one. And maybe occasionally listen to their criticisms about the apparently uninformed things he says. He really can’t have it both ways. He can’t be the smartest big-brain archaeology mind in the world, and then claim he’s “just a journalist” when his many factual errors are pointed out. Those are the opposite things.” – Bill Farley @ArchaeologyGame Archaeology Professor

“It is just sad to see all of that money, technology, and talent wasted on presenting misleading and pernicious ideas. I feel the same about the twenty seasons of “Ancient Aliens.” What a waste. The ancient past could have been presented without all of the anti-science garbage. The concern is that, just as he appears to be uninformed about many other aspects of archaeology, he is also uninformed about the racist associations of theories that invoke unitary origins for “civilization” and hyperdiffusionism. His work does not mention or critique these. The open letter from the SAA pointed out that the theory #AncientApocalypse presents, “has a long-standing association with racist, white-supremacist ideologies.” It did not call him a racist. Link.” – John Hoopes @KUHoopes Archaeologist

“Graham Hancock should conduct himself as a journalist instead of talking about his “research” in a way that makes it sound like he’s an archaeologist/scholar with the knowledge & truth His books are labeled non-fiction for a reason as there’s no scientific proof for his claims. And yes, many archaeologists and scholars have looked into Graham Hancock’s claims and theories to see if there is any possibility of truth in it. They came up empty-handed, that should say enough on its own Why won’t Graham Hancock FUND excavations at places he talks about? Not every culture is a civilization Cultures were sophisticated intelligent and capable of building amazing structures, but that doesn’t make them a civilization.” – History with Kayleigh @KayleighHistory History with Kayleigh YouTube

Addressing Graham Hancock the Pseudoarchaeological Theorist, as well as Flaws in his Ancient Apocalypse, Great flood, and Seafaring R1b

Archaeologists Identify Oldest Known Human Burial in Lower Central America. The unusually muscular young woman was buried in what is now Nicaragua nearly 6,000 years ago.

“In the Americas, middens are represented by radiocarbon dates of 5000–2000 BCE from Panama and eastern North America. Middens of South America and California probably antedate 2000 BCE.” ref

“The oldest pottery of northern Europe, eastern North America, and Central America occurs in shell mounds.” ref

A 5,000-year-old Earth Pyramid a human-made earth mound is found in North China as well. I actually think the thinking that leads to pyramid/Step Platform mounds is all related to North Asia, Southern Siberia/North China area. To me there are shared ideas related to the people’s movements that spread ideas including mounds/pyramids/step platform mounds. Platform Mounds/Pyramids, to me, relate to several kinds of mythology, creation myths, deity beliefs, heaven/spirits/afterlife/stars/moon/sun, etc. Along with power/elites/inequality/hierarchy. 

“I’ve been going since 1996 almost yearly. I’m not an archeologist or professional in any way. However, in my opinion it’s a mistake for anthropologists, etc. to single Cahokia out as a unique site because the relationship between Moundbuilders & Mississippians is complex. Cahokia became a “city” during the Glacial Warming Period. So, in my opinion there were people coming in from the South where the climate was probably too warm for their usual crops. The societal structure was similar to Mesoamerica. The first time I went there, it was under water because of local flooding. My ex-spouse was obsessed with the mounds because it’s part of his culture.  The water table is extremely high. Dickson Mounds is the same way. After the warming period ended and the Little Ice Age began, their crops would’ve failed on a massive scale. So, the huma sacrifices would’ve been an act of desperation. They were probably pushed south by other tribes. Somehow the Catawba who are Siouan language stock ended up in South Carolina while the rest were on the Northern Plains. The Cherokee were Iroquoian speakers in the middle of the Muskogean speaking people.” – Mellodi Zintkala @MZintkala Hunkpapa Lakota Ina~Unci

My response, I am still trying to understand all that happened. I look into languages, mythology beliefs, DNA, archaeology, anthropology, history, pottery, animal movements, plant movements, etc. I want to understand the big picture.

I do plan on finishing writing my book, “The Tree of Lies and its Hidden Roots: exposing the “evolution of religion” and removing the rationale of faith.“

Superstition to Religion “The Tree of Lies and its Hidden Roots” (my book I am still rewriting to publish)

I have been working on it for years. The info below explains but a part.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Here are my thoughts/speculations on where I believe is the possible origin of shamanism, which may have begun sometime around 35,000 to 30,000 years ago seen in the emergence of the Gravettian culture, just to outline his thinking, on what thousands of years later led to evolved Asian shamanism, in general, and thus WU shamanism as well. In both Europe-related “shamanism-possible burials” and in Gravettian mitochondrial DNA is a seeming connection to Haplogroup U. And the first believed Shaman proposed burial belonged to Eastern Gravettians/Pavlovian culture at Dolní Věstonice in southern Moravia in the Czech Republic, which is the oldest permanent human settlement that has ever been found. It is at Dolní Věstonice where approximately 27,000-25,000 years ago a seeming female shaman was buried and also there was an ivory totem portrait figure, seemingly of her.

And my thoughts on how cultural/ritual aspects were influenced in the area of Göbekli Tepe. I think it relates to a few different cultures starting in the area before the Neolithic. Two different groups of Siberians first from northwest Siberia with U6 haplogroup 40,000 to 30,000 or so. Then R Haplogroup (mainly haplogroup R1b but also some possible R1a both related to the Ancient North Eurasians). This second group added its “R1b” DNA of around 50% to the two cultures Natufian and Trialetian. To me, it is likely both of these cultures helped create Göbekli Tepe. Then I think the female art or graffiti seen at Göbekli Tepe to me possibly relates to the Epigravettians that made it into Turkey and have similar art in North Italy. I speculate that possibly the Totem pole figurines seen first at Kostenki, next went to Mal’ta in Siberia as seen in their figurines that also seem “Totem-pole-like”, and then with the migrations of R1a it may have inspired the Shigir idol in Russia and the migrations of R1b may have inspired Göbekli Tepe.

Seeming Connections: Totem poles, Ceremonial poles, Spirit poles, Sacred poles, Deity poles, Deities with poles, Pole star, Axis Mundi, Sacred trees, World tree, Maypole, Sun Dance with poles, etc.

ref, ref, ref

I tried to put all the DNA migrations, that together help explain Sami DNA, and thus some of their cultural influences.

Sami People

Uralic languages

Ancient North Eurasian

Eastern Hunter Gatherer 

Western Hunter-Gatherer

ref, ref, ref

“MA-1 genetic affinities of Mal’ta–Buret’ culture.” ref 

Mal’ta–Buret’ culture of Siberia near Lake Baikal

“The Mal’ta–Buret’ culture is an archaeological culture of c. 24,000 to 15,000 years ago in the Upper Paleolithic on the upper Angara River in the area west of Lake Baikal in the Irkutsk Oblast, Siberia, Russian Federation. The type sites are named for the villages of Mal’ta, Usolsky District, and Buret’, Bokhansky District (both in Irkutsk Oblast). And a buried boy whose remains were found near Mal’ta is usually known by the abbreviation MA-1, remains have been dated to 24,000 years ago. According to research published since 2013, MA-1 belonged to a population related to the genetic ancestors of Siberians, American Indians, and Bronze Age Yamnaya and Botai people of the Eurasian steppe. In particular, modern-day Native Americans, Kets, Mansi, and Selkup have been found to harbor a significant amount of ancestry related to MA-1.” ref

“MA-1 is the only known example of basal Y-DNA R* (R-M207*) – that is, the only member of haplogroup R* that did not belong to haplogroups R1, R2, or secondary subclades of these. The mitochondrial DNA of MA-1 belonged to an unresolved subclade of haplogroup U. The term Ancient North Eurasian (ANE) has been given in genetic literature to an ancestral component that represents descent from the people similar to the Mal’ta–Buret’ culture or a population closely related to them. A people similar to MA1 and Afontova Gora were important genetic contributors to Native Americans, Siberians, Northeastern Europeans, Caucasians, Central Asians, with smaller contributions to Middle Easterners and some East Asians. Lazaridis et al. (2016) notes “a cline of ANE ancestry across the east-west extent of Eurasia.” MA1 is also related to two older Upper Paleolithic Siberian individuals found at the Yana Rhinoceros Horn Site called Ancient North Siberians (ANS).” ref

FOLKLORE PARALLELS BETWEEN SIBERIA AND SOUTH ASIA AND THE MYTHOLOGY OF THE EURASIAN STEPPES*

“According to the myth about the origin of man recorded among the people of Eastern Europe and Siberia, the creator set a dog to guard the half-made human figures, but the antagonist bribed the guard and spoiled the creation, making humans vulnerable to disease. The creator told the dog to become the servant of man. Texts recorded in India (mostly among the Munda-speaking groups), the Dards of the Hindu Kush and the Abkhasians, though partly similar to the Northern Eurasian ones, do not share some important details: the antagonist is a horse, it tried to destroy man but a dog drove it away. In the Mongolian (more precisely, the Oirat) version, a cow acts instead of a horse, but in other respects, this variant is similar to the Abkhasian ones. Negative associations related to the horse are rather widespread
in Europe and Central Asia. Stories about the creation of man recorded in northern and southern Eurasia stemmed from the anthropogenic myth that was known to the Indo-Europeans of the Bronze Age. South Asia and the European–Siberian zone also share other tales, in particular the Earth-diver myth. Their analysis opens possibilities for reconstructing the early mythology of the inhabitants of the Eurasian steppe.” ref

Comparative Mythology

“Since the term ‘Ancient North Eurasian’ refers to a genetic bridge of connected mating networks, scholars of comparative mythology have argued that they probably shared myths and beliefs that could be reconstructed via the comparison of stories attested within cultures that were not in contact for millennia and stretched from the Pontic–Caspian steppe to the American continent. The mytheme of the dog guarding the Otherworld possibly stems from an older Ancient North Eurasian belief, as suggested by similar motifs found in Indo-European, Native American and Siberian mythology. In Siouan, Algonquian, Iroquoian, and in Central and South American beliefs, a fierce guard dog was located in the Milky Way, perceived as the path of souls in the afterlife, and getting past it was a test.” ref

“The Siberian Chukchi and Tungus believed in a guardian-of-the-afterlife dog and a spirit dog that would absorb the dead man’s soul and act as a guide in the afterlife. In Indo-European myths, the figure of the dog is embodied by Cerberus, Sarvarā, and Garmr. In Zoroastrianism, two four-eyed dogs guard the bridge to the afterlife called Chinvat Bridge. Anthony and Brown note that it might be one of the oldest mythemes recoverable through comparative mythology.” ref

“A second canid-related series of beliefs, myths and rituals connected dogs with healing rather than death. For instance, Ancient Near Eastern and Turkic–Kipchaq myths are prone to associate dogs with healing and generally categorised dogs as impure. A similar myth-pattern is assumed for the Eneolithic site of Botai in Kazakhstan, dated to 3500 BC, which might represent the dog as absorber of illness and guardian of the household against disease and evil. In Mesopotamia, the goddess Nintinugga, associated with healing, was accompanied or symbolized by dogs. Similar absorbent-puppy healing and sacrifice rituals were practiced in Greece and Italy, among the Hittites, again possibly influenced by Near Eastern traditions.” ref

ref

“The distribution area of traditions containing the northern and southern variants of the myth about the creation of man.
1 – the guard (usually a dog) cannot defend the human fgures created by God from the antagonist; 2 – the guard (usually a dog) successfully drives away the antagonist who tried to destroy God’s creation; 3 – the antagonist is a horse or a cow (among the Oirats).” ref

ref

“The distribution of certain mythological motifs in Eurasia. 1 – Spoiled creation: the dog lets the antagonist pass to the figures of people who were created by God; 2 – Earth-diver (approximate limits of the maximal distribution area of the motif); 3 – Striped chipmunk.” ref

ref

“Iroquois Creation Myth NSky Woman A Depiction Of The Iroquois Creation Myth Oil On Canvas 1936 By Ernest Smith Poster” ref

Earth-diver myth

(creation myth or cosmogonic myth, which is a type of cosmogony, 

a symbolic narrative of how the world began and how people first came to inhabit it.)

“The earth-diver is a common character in various traditional creation myths. In these stories, a supreme being usually sends an animal (most often a type of bird, but also crustaceans, insects, and fish in some narratives) into the primal waters to find bits of sand or mud with which to build habitable land. Some scholars interpret these myths psychologically while others interpret them cosmogonically. In both cases, emphasis is placed on beginnings emanating from the depths.” ref

“According to Gudmund Hatt and Tristram P. Coffin, Earth-diver myths are common in Native American folklore, among the following populations: Shoshone, Meskwaki, Blackfoot, Chipewyan, Newettee, Yokuts of California, Mandan, Hidatsa, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Ojibwe, Yuchi, and Cherokee. American anthropologist Gladys Reichard located the distribution of the motif across “all parts of North America”, save for “the extreme north, northeast, and southwest.” ref 

“In a 1977 study, anthropologist Victor Barnouw surmised that the earth-diver motif appeared in “hunting-gathering societies“, mainly among northerly groups such as the Hare, Dogrib, Kaska, Beaver, Carrier, Chipewyan, Sarsi, Cree, and Montagnais. Similar tales are also found among the Chukchi and Yukaghir, the Tatars, and many Finno-Ugric traditions, as well as among the Buryat and the Samoyed. In addition, the earth-diver motif also exists in narratives from Eastern Europe, namely Romani, Romanian, Slavic (namely, Bulgarian, Polish, Ukrainian, and Belarusian), and Lithuanian mythological traditions.” ref

“The pattern of distribution of these stories suggest they have a common origin in the eastern Asiatic coastal region, spreading as peoples migrated west into Siberia and east to the North American continent. However, there are examples of this mytheme found well outside of this boreal distribution pattern, for example the West African Yoruba creation myth of Ọbatala and Oduduwa. Characteristic of many Native American myths, earth-diver creation stories begin as beings and potential forms linger asleep or suspended in the primordial realm. The earth-diver is among the first of them to awaken and lay the necessary groundwork by building suitable lands where the coming creation will be able to live. In many cases, these stories will describe a series of failed attempts to make land before the solution is found.” ref

“Among the indigenous peoples of the Americas, the earth-diver cosmogony is attested in Iroquois mythology: a female sky deity falls from the heavens, and certain animals, the beaver, the otter, the duck, and the muskrat dive in the waters to fetch mud to construct an island. In a similar story from the Seneca, people lived in a sky realm. One day, the chief’s daughter was afflicted with a mysterious illness, and the only cure recommended for her (revealed in a dream) was to lie beside a tree and to have it be dug up. The people do so, but a man complains that the tree was their livelihood, and kicks the girl through the hole. She ends up falling from the sky to a world of only water, but is rescued by waterfowl.” ref

“A turtle offers to bear her on its shell, but asked where would be a definitive dwelling place for her. They decide to create land, and the toad dives into the depths of the primal sea to get pieces of soil. The toad puts it on the turtle’s back, which grows larger with every deposit of soil. In another version from the Wyandot, the Wyandot lived in heaven. The daughter of the Big Chief (or Mighty Ruler) was sick, so the medicine man recommends that they dig up the wild apple tree that stands next to the Lodge of the Mighty Ruler, because the remedy is to be found on its roots.” ref

“However, as the tree has been dug out, the ground begins to sink away, and the treetops catch and carry down the sick daughter with it. As the girl falls from the skies, two swans rescue her on their backs. The birds decide to summon all the Swimmers and the Water Tribes. Many volunteer to dive into the Great Water to fetch bits of earth from the bottom of the sea, but only the toad (female, in the story) is the one successful.” ref

GENES AND MYTHS: ANCIENT MAL’TA DNA AND THE EARTH-DIVER MYTHOLOGICAL MOTIF

“Earth-Diver is one of the most widely-distributed and well-studied cosmological myths. Found in mostly Uralic-speaking Eastern Europe, in Siberia, in Munda-speaking Northeast India and North America, its action is set in post-diluvial times when a demiurge sends various creatures to bring a piece of mud from the bottom of the ocean. The first creature fails, but the second one succeeds. Importantly, it’s the least likely creature that succeeds, while the more obvious favorite fails. A loon is a much better diver than a duck but it’s the duck that succeeds. In the end, the demiurge blows the earth out of the tiny piece of mud and restores life on it. Depending on the region, the diving creatures are different – in Eurasia it’s waterfowl birds – loon and duck, in North America it’s amphibians such as turtle or frog, animals such as otter or beaver or waterbirds, in Northeast India and the American Southwest – it’s arthropods.” ref

“The Initial Stages of Evolution of Uralic-Speakers: Evidence from a Mythological Reconstruction (Proto-Uralic Cosmogonic Myth) have suggested that the Earth-Diver motif is the folkloric manifestation of a more comprehensive system of beliefs related to the experiences of a shamanic flight in Northern Eurasian and Amerindian cultures. Siberian shamans liken themselves to waterfowl birds flying between worlds in search of the soul of their patient and they manipulate waterfowl figurines during their shamanic seances. Remarkably, very similar figurines are found at the 24,000-year-old Mal’ta archaeological site in South Siberia (see one on the left made out of a mammoth tusk), and Napol’skikh, in his 1991 book as well as in a recent talk (see video in Russian, roughly from 11:40 on) proposed that the Mal’ta people possessed the “cult of a waterfowl” and told the Earth-Diver myth. This means that the Earth-Diver motif may go back to pre-LGM times.” ref

“Mal’ta has recently made headlines thanks to the sequencing of the genome of a 4-year-old boy found at this site. The DNA sample fell in-between West Eurasians and Amerindians, without any special connection to East Asians, and showed typical West Eurasian mtDNA and Y-DNA haplogroups, namely U and R, respectively. They are sister lineages of widely distributed in the Americas hg B (mtDNA) and hg Q (Y-DNA). It appears that, in pre-LGM times, Amerindians and West Eurasians formed a genetic continuum and that modern East Asians did not yet emerge as a distinct population. This finding may put the distribution of the Earth-Diver myth into a new perspective. Per Davidski’s request, German Dziebel  adduce the map of the distribution of the Earth-Diver motif in Eurasia and North America (see the shaded areas on the left).” ref

“One should not expect a perfect fit between the distribution of myths and genes but the Earth-Diver distribution is rather clearly demarcated on a worldwide scale and does show continuity between West Eurasia and North America. The motif is notably absent from Western Europe – precisely the area that was covered with the glacier from 25,000 to 14,000 years ago – and from Beringia (Paleoasiatic peoples such as Chukchees and Koryaks as well as Eskimos don’t tell earth-diver stories), which may have been blocked by ice as well. Its presence in the Balkans is a due to relatively recent events such as Turkic and Avar migrations across the southern European steppe.” ref

“According to Napol’skikh’s motif phylogeny (on the left), the Earth-Diver myth has gone through 3 evolutionary stages – MNP-0, MNP-1 and MNP-2. At MNP-0, any creature (and any number of creatures) could become the demiurge’s helper as long as the least likely creature succeeded. At MNP-1, the plot crystallized around a pair of waterfowls in Siberia and Western North America and a pair of animals in Eastern North America. At MNP-3, one of the creatures dropped off and the demiurge used the help of only one helper. The “cladistics” of the myth is, therefore, rather simple: the dynamic and variable ancestral forms crystallize into progressively fewer characters.” ref

“As the detailed maps of motif and submotif distribution show, North America and Northern Eurasia share MNP-2 but then the rest of the variation is continent-specific. Eurasia has a number of clearly derived variants that are missing from the Americas, while America has a number variants not seen in Eurasia.  Napol’skikh observes that stage MNP-0 is better represented in North America – the region that tends to have more archaic versions of the motif and more basal motif diversity (not just waterfowls, but animals, too; not just two creatures but many, etc.). Remarkably, the use of arthropods by the demiurge is a trait shared by Munda-speaking Northeast Indians (see the Berezkin map of Eurasia above) and the Muskogean-speaking Amerindians from the Southeast, both areas being the southernmost extremes of the Earth-Diver distribution. As the Mal’ta boy is re-writing the prehistory of Eurasia, opportunities are growing for cross-disciplinary integration that would tie together genes and culture into a coherent story.” ref

ref

A: MNP-2 (two waterbirds)
B: MNP-1 (one waterbird)
C: amphibian as diver (only Romanians, possibly Roma influence)
D: MNP-2 with theo- or anthropomorphic characters who turn into waterbirds are the divers
E: MNP-1 with a theo- or anthropomorphic character as a waterbird
F: A theo- or anthropomorphic character does not turn into a bird but brings a piece of soil in his mouth
G: F: A theo- or anthropomorphic character does not turn into a bird but brings a piece of soil in his hands
H: fuzzy versions ref

ref

A: waterbird(s) are divers
B: animals (otter, beaver) are divers
C: amphibians (turtle, frog, toad) are divers
D: arthropods (beetle, lobster) are divers
E: birds and animals are divers
F: birds and a turtle are divers
G: fuzzy versions ref

Earth-Diver” and “Emergence from Under the Earth”: Cosmogonic Tales as Evidence 

ref

ref

ref

ref

ref

Folklore Parallels Between Siberia And South Asia And The Mythology Of The Eurasian Steppes

“According to the myth about the origin of man recorded among the people of Eastern Europe and Siberia, the creator set a dog to guard the half-made human figures, but the antagonist bribed the guard and spoiled the creation, making humans vulnerable to disease. The creator told the dog to become the servant of man. Texts recorded in India (mostly among the Munda-speaking groups), the Dards of the Hindu Kush and the Abkhasians, though partly similar to the Northern Eurasian ones, do not share some important details: the antagonist is a horse, it tried to destroy man but a dog drove it away. In the Mongolian (more precisely, the Oirat) version, a cow acts instead of a horse, but in other respects this variant is similar to the Abkhasian ones. Negative associations related to the horse are rather widespread in Europe and Central Asia. Stories about the creation of man recorded in northern and southern Eurasia stemmed from the anthropogenic myth that was known to the Indo-Europeans of the Bronze Age. South Asia and the European–Siberian zone also share other tales, in particular the Earth-diver myth. Their analysis opens possibilities for reconstructing the early mythology of the inhabitants of the Eurasian steppe.” ref

Diver-Myths

“Scientific evidence has shown that at one point parts of the earth that are now dry were covered by water. Many myths allude to this fact by imagining a world once covered by water. Many myths, called diver-myths (Long 188), consisted of a being diving into the water that covers the earth to retrieve some earth. The earth brought to the surface became the land we know today. Other stories had the mud brought to the surface in a different way, but many had the common element of some earth being brought to the surface of the water and growing until it became the Earth.” ref

“According to the Iroquois Native Americans water animals inhabited the Earth before there was land. When a Sky Woman fell from her home above they caught her and dove into the seas to bring up mud. This mud they spread onto the back of Big Turtle. There it began to grow until it became North America.” ref

“The Japanese creation myth painted a picture of a muddy ocean which covered the world at the beginning of time. A god and goddess, Izanagi and Izanami, became curious about what was beneath the ocean. Izanagi took his staff and threw it into the ocean. As he lifted it back up some lumps of earth fell off into the water. These became the islands of Japan. No being dove beneath the waters to find mud, but the element of earth being covered by water and a being bringing the earth up is there.” ref

“The creation myth of Christians and Jews does not tell of God diving into the water to bring up mud, but Genesis 1:2 says Òthe Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.Ó Therefore according to the Torah and Bible the Earth was once covered entirely by water.” ref

Power of Myths

“The most obvious function of myths is the explanation of facts, whether natural or cultural. One North American Indian (Abenaki) myth, for example, explains the origin of corn (maize): a lonely man meets a beautiful woman with long, fair hair; she promises to remain with him if he follows her instructions; she tells him in detail how to make a fire and, after he has done so, she orders him to drag her over the burned ground; as a result of these actions, he will see her silken hair (viz., the cornstalk) reappear, and thereafter he will have corn seeds for his use. Henceforth, whenever Abenaki Indians see corn (the woman’s hair), they know that she remembers them.” ref

“Obviously, a myth such as this one functions as an explanation, but the narrative form distinguishes it from a straightforward answer to an intellectual question about causes. The function of explanation and the narrative form go together, since the imaginative power of the myth lends credibility to the explanation and crystallizes it into a memorable and enduring form. Hence myths play an important part in many traditional systems of education. Many myths explain ritual and cultic customs. According to myths from the island of Ceram (in Indonesia), in the beginning life was not complete, or not yet “human”: vegetation and animals did not exist, and there was neither death nor sexuality. In a mysterious manner Hainuwele, a girl with extraordinary gift-bestowing powers, appeared.” ref

“The people killed her at the end of their great annual celebration, and her dismembered body was planted in the earth. Among the species that sprang up after this act of planting were tubers—the staple diet of the people telling the myth. With a certain circularity frequent in mythology, the myth validates the very cultic celebration mentioned in the myth. The cult can be understood as a commemoration of those first events. Hence, the myth can be said to validate life itself together with the cultic celebration. Comparable myths are told in a number of societies where the main means of food production is the cultivation of root crops; the myths reflect the fact that tubers must be cut up and buried in the earth for propagation to take place.” ref

“Ritual sacrifices are typical of traditional peasant cultures. In most cases such customs are related to mythical events. Among important themes are the necessity of death (e.g., the grain “dies” and is buried, only to yield a subsequent harvest), a society’s cyclic renewal of itself (e.g., New Year’s celebrations), and the significance of women and sexuality. New Year’s celebrations, often accompanied by a temporary abandonment of all rules, may be related to or justified by mythical themes concerning a return to chaos and a return of the dead.” ref

“In every mythological tradition one myth or cluster of myths tends to be central. The subject of the central mythology is often cosmogony (origin of the cosmos). In many of those ceremonies that each society has developed as a symbol of what is necessary to its well-being, references are made to the beginning of the world. Examples include the enthronements of kings, which in some traditions (as in Fiji or ancient India) are associated with a creation or re-creation of the world. Analogously, in ancient Mesopotamia the creation epic Enuma elish, which was read each New Year at Babylon, celebrated the progress of the cosmos from initial anarchy to government by the kingship of Marduk; hence the authority of earthly rulers, and of earthly monarchy in general, was implicitly supported and justified.” ref

“Ruling families in ancient civilizations frequently justified their position by invoking myths—for example, that they had divine origins. Examples are known from imperial China, pharaonic Egypt, the Hittite empire, Polynesia, the Inca empire, and India. Elites have also based their claims to privilege on myths. The French historian of ancient religion Georges Dumézil was the pioneer in suggesting that the priestly, warrior, and producing classes in ancient Indo-European societies regarded themselves as having been ordained to particular tasks by virtue of their mythological origins. And in every known cultural tradition there exists some mythological foundation that is referred to when defending marriage and funerary customs.” ref

“Creation myths play a significant role in healing the sick; they are recited (e.g., among the Navajo people of North America) when an individual’s world—that is to say, the person’s life—is in jeopardy. Thus, healing through recitation of a cosmogony is one example of the use of myth as a magical incantation. Another example is the case of Icelandic poets, who, in the singing of the episode in Old Norse mythology in which the god Odin wins for gods and humans the “mead of song” (a drink containing the power of poetic inspiration), can be said to be celebrating the origins of their own art and, hence, renewing it.” ref

“Modern science did not evolve in its entirety as a rebellion against myth, nor at its birth did it suddenly throw off the shackles of myth. In ancient Greece the naturalists of Ionia (western Asia Minor), long regarded as the originators of science, developed views of the universe that were in fact very close to the creation myths of their time. Those who laid the foundations of modern science, such as Nicholas of Cusa, Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton, and Gottfried Leibniz, were absorbed by metaphysical problems of which the traditional, indeed mythological, character is evident. Among these problems were the nature of infinity and the question of the omnipotence of God. The influence of mythological views is seen in the English physician William Harvey’s association of the circulation of the blood with the planetary movements and Charles Darwin’s explanation of woman’s menstrual cycles by the tides of the ocean.” ref

Shell Mound Summer Solstice Feasts – Laboratory of Southeastern Archaeology

“A spectacular archaeological site with a generic name lies on the end of a peninsula about 12 km north of the town of Cedar Key. Shell Mound (8LV42) is well known to many people who live in and visit the Cedar Key area, but until recently details of its age and use were few. Since 2012 the LSA has delved into the many mysteries of Shell Mound and now have a reasonably good sense of what happened there between about 400 and 650 CE. As the name implies, Shell Mound is a shell mound, although it actually is more of a shell ring. In relief reaching up to 7 m above the ground surface, Shell Mound is a subcircular ridge about 180 x 170 m in outside diameter enclosing an open area about 60 m wide. A program of extensive test excavation revealed a more complex picture than Shell Mound’s surface allows. Deposits along the north and south ridges (arcs) of this subcircle are entirely different. The north ridge consists mostly of dune sands, with midden on top and large in-filled pits along the south slope. Much of the south ridge consists of redeposited midden and pit fill from the inside of the north ridge, terraforming that occurred after about 150 years of occupation, ca. 550 CE. Whether done all at once or in phases of individual mounds, construction of the south ridge enclosed what is arguably a central plaza. Our limited testing in this open space provided suggestive evidence for buildings along the interior edge. A small circular village of 10-15 households is a reasonable estimate in need of testing.” ref

Mound Builders

“Many pre-Columbian cultures in North America were collectively termed “Mound Builders“, but the term has no formal meaning. It does not refer to specific people or archaeological culture but refers to the characteristic mound earthworks that indigenous peoples erected for an extended period of more than 5,000 years. The “Mound Builder” cultures span the period of roughly 3500 BCE (the construction of Watson Brake) to the 16th century CE, including the Archaic period (Horr’s Island), Woodland period (Caloosahatchee, Adena, and Hopewell cultures), and Mississippian period. Geographically, the cultures were present in the region of the Great Lakes, the Ohio River Valley, Florida, and the Mississippi River Valley and its tributary waters.” ref

“The first mound building was an early marker of political and social complexity among the cultures in the Eastern United States. Watson Brake in Louisiana, constructed about 3500 BCE during the Middle Archaic period, is the oldest known and dated mound complex in North America. It is one of 11 mound complexes from this period found in the Lower Mississippi Valley. These cultures generally had developed hierarchical societies that had an elite. These commanded hundreds or even thousands of workers to dig up tons of earth with the hand tools available, move the soil long distances, and finally, workers to create the shape with layers of soil as directed by the builders. However early mounds found in Louisiana preceded such cultures and were products of hunter-gatherer cultures.” ref

“Radiocarbon dating has established the age of the earliest Archaic mound complex in southeastern Louisiana. One of the two Monte Sano Site mounds, excavated in 1967 before being destroyed for new construction at Baton Rouge, was dated at 6220 BP (plus or minus 140 years). Researchers at the time thought that such hunter-gatherer societies were not organizationally capable of this type of construction. It has since been dated as about 6500 BP or 4500 BCE, although not all agree.” ref

“Watson Brake is located in the floodplain of the Ouachita River near Monroe in northern Louisiana. Securely dated to about 5,400 years ago (around 3500 BCE), in the Middle Archaic period, it consists of a formation of 11 mounds from 3 feet (0.91 m) to 25 feet (7.6 m) tall, connected by ridges to form an oval nearly 900 feet (270 m) across. In the Americas, the building of complex earthwork mounds started at an early date, well before the pyramids of Egypt were constructed. Watson Brake was being constructed nearly 2,000 years before the better-known Poverty Point, and the building continued for 500 years. Middle Archaic mound construction seems to have ceased about 2800 BCE. Scholars have not ascertained the reason, but it may have been because of changes in river patterns or other environmental factors.” ref

“With the 1990s dating of Watson Brake and similar complexes, scholars established that pre-agricultural, pre-ceramic American societies could organize to accomplish complex construction during extended periods, invalidating scholars’ traditional ideas of Archaic society. Watson Brake was built by a hunter-gatherer society, the people of which occupied this area only on a seasonal basis. Successive generations organized to build the complex mounds over 500 years. Their food consisted mostly of fish and deer, as well as available plants.” ref

“Poverty Point, built about 1500 BCE in what is now Louisiana, is a prominent example of Late Archaic mound-builder construction (around 2500 BCE – 1000 BCE). It is a striking complex of more than 1 square mile (2.6 km²), where six earthwork crescent ridges were built in concentric arrangement, interrupted by radial aisles. Three mounds are also part of the main complex, and evidence of residences extends for about 3 miles (4.8 km) along the bank of Bayou Macon. It is the major site among 100 associated with the Poverty Point culture and is one of the best-known early examples of earthwork monumental architecture. Unlike the localized societies during the Middle Archaic, this culture showed evidence of a wide trading network outside its area, which is one of its distinguishing characteristics.” ref

“Horr’s Island, Florida, now a gated community next to Marco Island, was excavated by Michael Russo in 1980. He found an Archaic Indian village site. Mound A was a burial mound that dated to 3400 BCE, making it the oldest known burial mound in North America.” ref

“From about 800 CE, the mound-building cultures were dominated by the Mississippian culture, a large archaeological horizon, whose youngest descendants, the Plaquemine culture and the Fort Ancient culture, were still active at the time of European contact in the 16th century. One tribe of the Fort Ancient culture has been identified as the Mosopelea, presumably of southeast Ohio, who spoke an Ohio Valley Siouan language. The bearers of the Plaquemine culture were presumably speakers of the Natchez language isolate. The first written description of these cultures were made by members of Spanish explorer Hernando de Soto‘s expedition, between 1540 and 1542.” ref

“The namesake cultural trait of the Mound Builders was the building of mounds and other earthworks. These burial and ceremonial structures were typically flat-topped pyramids or platform mounds, flat-topped or rounded cones, elongated ridges, and sometimes a variety of other forms. They were generally built as part of complex villages. The early earthworks built in Louisiana around 3500 BCE are the only ones known to have been built by a hunter-gatherer culture, rather than a more settled culture based on agricultural surpluses.” ref

“The best-known flat-topped pyramidal structure is Monks Mound at Cahokia, near present-day Collinsville, Illinois. This community was the center of the Mississippian culture. This mound appears to have been the main ceremonial and residential mound for the religious and political leaders; it is more than 100 feet (30 m) tall and is the largest pre-Columbian earthwork north of Mexico. This site had numerous mounds, some with conical or ridge tops, as well as palisaded stockades protecting the large settlement and elite quarter. At its maximum about 1150 CE, Cahokia was an urban settlement with 20,000–30,000 people. This population was not exceeded by North American European settlements until after 1800.” ref

“Some effigy mounds were constructed in the shapes or outlines of culturally significant animals. The most famous effigy mound, Serpent Mound in southern Ohio, ranges from 1 foot (0.30 m) to just over 3 feet (0.91 m) tall, 20 feet (6.1 m) wide, more than 1,330 feet (410 m) long, and shaped as an undulating serpent.” ref

ref

The Hopewell pre-Columbian “mound-builders” Cosmos

“The People of the Eastern Woodlands clearly possessed a rich cosmological framework enhanced by an understanding of astronomy and mathematics. Subsumed in development, the sites are sequestered from the landscape to form an image that today’s society finds agreeable, an image that archaeologists possess the means to retract.” ref

Suggested Cosmology and Retracted Image: An Analysis of the Newark Earthworks

“Across American society today, prevailing trends purvey an understanding of Eastern Woodland Peoples as naturalistic itinerants with a deep and harmonious awareness of forests, waters, and the bounty offered therein. Almost as a default, ‘structure’ suggests images of impermanent longhouses and wigwams. Likewise, ‘culture’ suggests a reverence for the Earth. People seldom consider Native Americans movers and shapers of the landscapes around them, especially in the context of timelines extending back nearly 2000 years. In archaeological practice, the rigid assumptions of the populace at large endanger objective analysis from the outset, especially when it comes to the identification of significant sites and the decision to interpret evidence.” ref

“In Newark, Ohio, not far from Columbus, lies what basic historical literature refers to as “the largest set of geometric earthen enclosures in the world” (“Newark Earthworks”). Even though the area surrounding the sites is highly urbanized in a way that engulfs each one as a separate island of greenspace, archaeology is concerned with the ancient context that extends throughout the landscape. Here, sites of interest have been revealed by extrapolating Native American cosmology and mathematics from features on the landscape.” ref

“Recent studies using ground and aerial survey techniques emphasize the importance of Geller Hill in understanding the creation and significance of the Newark Earthworks. Plotted on a map in the midst of a flat plain, Geller Hill is a landmark. Using the diameter of Newark’s Observatory Circle (OCD) as a baseline, archaeologists recognize the significance placed on spatial distance by Hopewell peoples. Located approximately seven OCDs from the peak of Geller Hill, the centers of the Newark’s octagonal and circular earthworks appear to form the sides of an isosceles triangle. According to a local source, “the measured Geller Hill, Octagon, Great Circle triangle varies from the geometric ideal by an average of less than one percent,” much like other Hopewell sites (Romain).” ref

“Consistent use of the OCD lends credence to an integrated view of landscape and erodes the perception of Native American societies as hapless in their patterns of settlement and naive in their understanding of the universe. Altogether, the Newark Earthworks compose an extensive natural observatory that people used to position themselves within a valid reality. The triangle’s axis of symmetry “[aligns with] the moon’s maximum north rise point” and thereby associates the site with Hopewell ideas of a balance cosmos. Bradley T. Lepper goes so far as to compare the site with a “gigantic machine or factory” drawing together the energies of the Hopewell universe (Lepper).” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

North America

Central America

South America

Aztecs

Maya

Incas

ref

This art is a “Display at Chucalissa Mounds in Memphis showing all the elements involved in the Path of Souls death journey, a widely held belief system among the mound builders of America.” ref

“Artist Jack Johnson’s interpretation of southeastern Native cosmology, showing the tripartite division of the world. The axis mundi is depicted as a tree or post connecting the fire symbol of this world, the sun symbol of the upper world and the ‘swastika’ symbol of the lower world.” ref

“It should be remembered that the Mississippian culture that built Cahokia may have considered a cedar tree or a striped cedar pole to be a symbol of the Axis Mundi (also called the cosmic axis, world axis, world pillar, the center of the world, or world tree – has been greatly extended to refer to any mythological concept representing “the connection between Heaven and Earth” or the “higher and lower realms), the pillar connecting the above, middle, & below worlds, & around which the cosmos turns An American Yggdrasil (Norse tree of life). Some work has gone into reconstructing the woodhenge, and it is one of the sites around Cahokia that you can visit today. (The Solar Calendar of Woodhenge in Cahokia | Native America: Cities of the Sky).” – Vulpine Outlaw @Rad_Sherwoodism

“Items adduced as examples of the axis mundi by comparative mythologists include plants (notably a tree but also other types of plants such as a vine or stalk), a mountain, a column of smoke or fire, or a product of human manufacture (such as a staff, a tower, a ladder, a staircase, a maypole, a cross, a steeple, a rope, a totem pole, a pillar, a spire). Its proximity to heaven may carry implications that are chiefly religious (pagoda, temple mount, minaret, church) or secular (obelisk, lighthouse, rocket, skyscraper). The image appears in religious and secular contexts. The axis mundi symbol may be found in cultures utilizing shamanic practices or animist belief systems, in major world religions, and in technologically advanced “urban centers.” ref

Do we know what the symbols represent?

 “Yes. It’s a bit more than I’d want to post on TwiX right now. It’s showing the 3-part universe, an upper, lower, and middle world, & the Milky Way is shown as well as Orion the Hand Constellation, Scorpius the ruler of the underworld, and Cygnus, the Judge. Also the main powers of the upper & lower worlds.” – Gregory L Little, Ed.D. @DrGregLittle2

Gregory L Little, Ed.D. BA/MS Psychology, Ed.D. Counseling/Ed. Psych Author since ’84 (70+ books/workbooks). Mound Builder Society: Be Kind; Respect Everything; Honor the Ancient Ones. 

EVIDENCE FOR STEPPED PYRAMIDS OF SHELL IN THE WOODLAND PERIOD OF EASTERN NORTH AMERICA

ref

“The Paleolithic dog was a Late Pleistocene canine. They were directly associated with human hunting camps in Europe over 30,000 years ago and it is proposed that these were domesticated. They are further proposed to be either a proto-dog and the ancestor of the domestic dog or an extinct, morphologically and genetically divergent wolf population. There are a number of recently discovered specimens which are proposed as being Paleolithic dogs, however, their taxonomy is debated. These have been found in either Europe or Siberia and date 40,000–17,000 years ago. They include Hohle Fels in Germany, Goyet Caves in Belgium, Predmosti in the Czech Republic, and four sites in Russia: Razboinichya Cave in the Altai Republic, Kostyonki-8, Ulakhan Sular in the Sakha Republic, and Eliseevichi 1 on the Russian plain.” ref

1. 40,000–35,500 years ago Hohle Fels, Schelklingen, Germany
2. 36,500 years ago Goyet Caves, Samson River Valley, Belgium
3. 33,500 years ago Razboinichya Cave,  Altai Mountains, (Russia/Siberia)
4. 33,500–26,500 years ago Kostyonki-Borshchyovo archaeological complex, (Kostenki site) Voronezh, Russia
5. 31,000 years ago Predmostí, Moravia, Czech Republic
6. 26,000 years ago Chauvet Cave, Vallon-Pont-d’Arc, Ardèche region, France
7. 17,300–14,100 years ago Dyuktai Cave, northern Yakutia, Siberia
8. 17,000–16,000 years ago Eliseevichi-I site, Bryansk Region, Russian Plain, Russia
9. 16,900 years ago Afontova Gora-1, Yenisei River, southern Siberia
10. 14,223 years ago Bonn–Oberkassel, Germany
11. 13,500 years ago Mezine, Chernigov region, Ukraine
12. 13,000 years ago Palegawra, (Zarzian culture) Iraq
13. 12,800 years ago Ushki I, Kamchatka, eastern Siberia
14. 12,790 years ago Nanzhuangtou, China
15. 12,300 years ago Ust’-Khaita site, Baikal region, Siberia
16. 12,000 years ago Ain Mallaha (Eynan) and HaYonim terrace, Israel
17. 10,150 years ago Lawyer’s Cave, Alaska, USA
18. 9,000 years ago Jiahu site, China
19. 8,000 years ago Svaerdborg site, Denmark
20. 7,425 years ago Lake Baikal region, Siberia
21. 7,000 years ago Tianluoshan archaeological site, Zhejiang province, China ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Native American dogs

“Native American dogs, or Pre-Columbian dogs, were dogs living with people indigenous to the Americas. Arriving about 10,000 years ago alongside Paleoindians, today they make up a fraction of dog breeds that range from the Alaskan Malamute to the Peruvian Hairless Dog. The earliest evidence for dogs in the Americas can be found in Danger Cave, Utah, a site which has been dated to between 9,000 and 10,000 years BCE. These New World dogs have been shown to descend from Old World Eurasian grey wolves. The pre-contact dogs exhibit a unique genetic signature that is now gone, with DNA from the cell nucleus indicating that their nearest genetic relatives today are the Arctic breed dogs—Alaskan Malamutes, Greenland Dogs, Alaskan huskies, Carolina Dogs, and Siberian Huskies. It is theorized that there were four separate introductions of the dog over the past nine thousand years, in which five different lineages were founded in the Americas.” ref

“In 2018, a study compared sequences of North American dog fossils with Siberian dog fossils and modern dogs. The nearest relative to the North American fossils was a 9,000 BCE fossil discovered on Zhokhov Island, Arctic north-eastern Siberia, which was connected to the mainland at that time. The study inferred from mDNA that all of the North American dogs shared a common ancestor dated 14,600 BCE, and this ancestor had diverged along with the ancestor of the Zhokhov dog from their common ancestor 15,600 BCE. The timing of the Koster dogs shows that dogs entered North America from Siberia 4,500 years after humans did, were isolated for the next 9,000 years, and after contact with Europeans these no longer exist because they were replaced by Eurasian dogs.” ref

“In South America, the introduction of the dog took place sometime between around 7,550 and 4,550 years ago (5550–2550 BCE). Findings for dogs in South America get only denser by around 3,550  years ago (1550 BCE) but seem to be restricted to agricultural areas in the Andes. The oldest finding of a dog for Brazil is radiocarbon dated to between (249–424 CE), and for the Pampas of Argentina the oldest is dated as (1020 CE). In Peru, depictions of Peruvian hairless dogs appear around 750 CE on Moche ceramic vessels and continue in later Andean ceramic traditions.” ref

The Mytheme of Ancient North Eurasian Sacred-Dog belief and similar motifs are found in Indo-European, Native American, and Siberian comparative mythology

Dog Domestication, Shamanism, and Emerging “Sacred Companion” Mortuary Rituals between 33,000 to 12,000 years ago?

Anarchists Cory Johnston (in Saskatchewan) and Damien Marie AtHope (in Florida) seek to learn more about the indigenous peoples of the Americas (First Nations/Native Americans) where they both live.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref

“A creation myth (or cosmogonic myth) is a symbolic narrative of how the world began and how people first came to inhabit it. While in popular usage the term myth often refers to false or fanciful stories, members of cultures often ascribe varying degrees of truth to their creation myths. In the society in which it is told, a creation myth is usually regarded as conveying profound truths – metaphorically, symbolically, historically, or literally. They are commonly, although not always, considered cosmogonical myths – that is, they describe the ordering of the cosmos from a state of chaos or amorphousness.” ref

“Creation myths often share a number of features. They often are considered sacred accounts and can be found in nearly all known religious traditions. They are all stories with a plot and characters who are either deities, human-like figures, or animals, who often speak and transform easily. They are often set in a dim and nonspecific past that historian of religion Mircea Eliade termed in illo tempore (‘at that time’). Creation myths address questions deeply meaningful to the society that shares them, revealing their central worldview and the framework for the self-identity of the culture and individual in a universal context. Creation myths develop in oral traditions and therefore typically have multiple versions; found throughout human culture, they are the most common form of myth.” ref

Creation myth definitions from modern references:

• “A “symbolic narrative of the beginning of the world as understood in a particular tradition and community. Creation myths are of central importance for the valuation of the world, for the orientation of humans in the universe, and for the basic patterns of life and culture.”
• “Creation myths tell us how things began. All cultures have creation myths; they are our primary myths, the first stage in what might be called the psychic life of the species. As cultures, we identify ourselves through the collective dreams we call creation myths, or cosmogonies. … Creation myths explain in metaphorical terms our sense of who we are in the context of the world, and in so doing they reveal our real priorities, as well as our real prejudices. Our images of creation say a great deal about who we are.”
• A “philosophical and theological elaboration of the primal myth of creation within a religious community. The term myth here refers to the imaginative expression in narrative form of what is experienced or apprehended as basic reality … The term creation refers to the beginning of things, whether by the will and act of a transcendent being, by emanation from some ultimate source, or in any other way.” ref

Religion professor Mircea Eliade defined the word myth in terms of creation:

“Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the “beginnings.” In other words, myth tells how, through the deeds of Supernatural Beings, a reality came into existence, be it the whole of reality, the Cosmos, or only a fragment of reality – an island, a species of plant, a particular kind of human behavior, an institution.” ref

“All creation myths are in one sense etiological because they attempt to explain how the world formed and where humanity came from. Myths attempt to explain the unknown and sometimes teach a lesson.” ref

“Some Ethnologists and anthropologists who study origin myths say that in the modern context theologians try to discern humanity’s meaning from revealed truths and scientists investigate cosmology with the tools of empiricism and rationality, but creation myths define human reality in very different terms. In the past, historians of religion and other students of myth thought of such stories as forms of primitive or early-stage science or religion and analyzed them in a literal or logical sense. Today, however, they are seen as symbolic narratives which must be understood in terms of their own cultural context. Charles Long writes: “The beings referred to in the myth – gods, animals, plants – are forms of power grasped existentially. The myths should not be understood as attempts to work out a rational explanation of deity.” ref

“While creation myths are not literal explications, they do serve to define an orientation of humanity in the world in terms of a birth story. They provide the basis of a worldview that reaffirms and guides how people relate to the natural world, to any assumed spiritual world, and to each other. A creation myth acts as a cornerstone for distinguishing primary reality from relative reality, the origin and nature of being from non-being. In this sense, cosmogonic myths serve as a philosophy of life – but one expressed and conveyed through symbol rather than through systematic reason. And in this sense, they go beyond etiological myths (which explain specific features in religious rites, natural phenomena, or cultural life). Creation myths also help to orient human beings in the world, giving them a sense of their place in the world and the regard that they must have for humans and nature.” ref

Historian David Christian has summarised issues common to multiple creation myths:

“Each beginning seems to presuppose an earlier beginning. … Instead of meeting a single starting point, we encounter an infinity of them, each of which poses the same problem. … There are no entirely satisfactory solutions to this dilemma. What we have to find is not a solution but some way of dealing with the mystery …. And we have to do so using words. The words we reach for, from God to gravity, are inadequate to the task. So we have to use language poetically or symbolically; and such language, whether used by a scientist, a poet, or a shaman, can easily be misunderstood.” ref

“Mythologists have applied various schemes to classify creation myths found throughout human cultures. Eliade and his colleague Charles Long developed a classification based on some common motifs that reappear in stories the world over. The classification identifies five basic types: Brahmā, the Hindu deva of creation, emerges from a lotus risen from the navel of Viṣņu, who lies with Lakshmi on the serpent Ananta Shesha.” ref

• “Creation ex nihilo in which the creation is through the thought, word, dream, or bodily secretions of a divine being.
• Earth diver creation in which a diver, usually a bird or amphibian sent by a creator, plunges to the seabed through a primordial ocean to bring up sand or mud which develops into a terrestrial world.
• Emergence myths in which progenitors pass through a series of worlds and metamorphoses until reaching the present world.
• Creation by the dismemberment of a primordial being.
• Creation by the splitting or ordering of a primordial unity such as the cracking of a cosmic egg or a bringing order from chaos.” ref

“Marta Weigle further developed and refined this typology to highlight nine themes, adding elements such as deus faber, a creation crafted by a deity, creation from the work of two creators working together or against each other, creation from sacrifice, and creation from division/conjugation, accretion/conjunction, or secretion.” ref

An alternative system based on six recurring narrative themes was designed by Raymond Van Over:

• “Primeval abyss, an infinite expanse of waters or space.
• Originator deity which is awakened or an eternal entity within the abyss.
• Originator deity poised above the abyss.
• Cosmic egg or embryo.
• Originator deity creating life through sound or word.
• Life generating from the corpse or dismembered parts of an originator deity.” ref

Creation myths: From chaos, Ex nihilo, Earth-diver, Emergence, World egg, and World parent

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

“These ideas are my speculations from the evidence.”

I am still researching the “god‘s origins” all over the world. So you know, it is very complicated but I am smart and willing to look, DEEP, if necessary, which going very deep does seem to be needed here, when trying to actually understand the evolution of gods and goddesses. I am sure of a few things and less sure of others, but even in stuff I am not fully grasping I still am slowly figuring it out, to explain it to others. But as I research more I am understanding things a little better, though I am still working on understanding it all or something close and thus always figuring out more. 

Sky Father/Sky God?

“Egyptian: (Nut) Sky Mother and (Geb) Earth Father” (Egypt is different but similar)

Turkic/Mongolic: (Tengri/Tenger Etseg) Sky Father and (Eje/Gazar Eej) Earth Mother *Transeurasian*

Hawaiian: (Wākea) Sky Father and (Papahānaumoku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

New Zealand/ Māori: (Ranginui) Sky Father and (Papatūānuku) Earth Mother *Austronesian*

Proto-Indo-European: (Dyḗus/Dyḗus ph₂tḗr) Sky Father and (Dʰéǵʰōm/Pleth₂wih₁) Earth Mother

Indo-Aryan: (Dyaus Pita) Sky Father and (Prithvi Mata) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Italic: (Jupiter) Sky Father and (Juno) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Etruscan: (Tinia) Sky Father and (Uni) Sky Mother *Tyrsenian/Italy Pre–Indo-European*

Hellenic/Greek: (Zeus) Sky Father and (Hera) Sky Mother who started as an “Earth Goddess” *Indo-European*

Nordic: (Dagr) Sky Father and (Nótt) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Slavic: (Perun) Sky Father and (Mokosh) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Illyrian: (Deipaturos) Sky Father and (Messapic Damatura’s “earth-mother” maybe) Earth Mother *Indo-European*

Albanian: (Zojz) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Baltic: (Perkūnas) Sky Father and (Saulė) Sky Mother *Indo-European*

Germanic: (Týr) Sky Father and (?) *Indo-European*

Colombian-Muisca: (Bochica) Sky Father and (Huythaca) Sky Mother *Chibchan*

Aztec: (Quetzalcoatl) Sky Father and (Xochiquetzal) Sky Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Incan: (Viracocha) Sky Father and (Mama Runtucaya) Sky Mother *Quechuan*

China: (Tian/Shangdi) Sky Father and (Dì) Earth Mother *Sino-Tibetan*

Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian: (An/Anu) Sky Father and (Ki) Earth Mother

Finnish: (Ukko) Sky Father and (Akka) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Sami: (Horagalles) Sky Father and (Ravdna) Earth Mother *Finno-Ugric*

Puebloan-Zuni: (Ápoyan Ta’chu) Sky Father and (Áwitelin Tsíta) Earth Mother

Puebloan-Hopi: (Tawa) Sky Father and (Kokyangwuti/Spider Woman/Grandmother) Earth Mother *Uto-Aztecan*

Puebloan-Navajo: (Tsohanoai) Sky Father and (Estsanatlehi) Earth Mother *Na-Dene*

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Sky Father/Sky Mother “High Gods” or similar gods/goddesses of the sky more loosely connected, seeming arcane mythology across the earth seen in Siberia, China, Europe, Native Americans/First Nations People and Mesopotamia, etc.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

1. Kebaran culture 23,022-16,522 Years Ago, 2. Kortik Tepe 12,422-11,722 Years Ago, 3. Jerf el-Ahmar 11,222 -10,722 Years Ago, 4. Gobekli Tepe 11,152-9,392 Years Ago, 5. Tell Al-‘abrUbaid and Uruk Periods, 6. Nevali Cori 10,422 -10,122 Years Ago, 7. Catal Hoyuk 9,522-7,722 Years Ago

Sifting through the relation of Bird spirits/deities of the sky (20,000 to 5,000 years ago)

Koryaks: Indigenous People of the Russian Far East and Big Raven myths also found in Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian, and other Indigenous People of North America

(Native American mythology)

“HAYICANAKO is a Tlingit (Na-dene Language) Earth Goddess. An elderly Goddess who has the world on a stick. ’The Old Woman Beneath Us’. She holds the pole supporting the Earth and gives it a shake now and then if she is not happy about something. In case of earthquakes it is best to placate her by pouring some melting fat on the fire — it will drip down until it reaches her.” ref

“HAYICANAKO is the Tlingit Goddess of natural order. She is a giantess who lives in a mountain, where she holds up a column that supports the earth. When she gets hungry, she loses her concentration and the column starts to quiver, causing earthquakes. Her hunger can be fed by her worshippers throwing fat into their fires. Another version says that earthquakes happen when Raven jostles her arm and tries to make her lose her grip. Hayicanako’s name, which means “Old Woman Underneath Us,” is also seen as HAYICANAK.” ref

 Raven made a woman under the earth to have charge of the rise and fall of the tides.

“Raven made a woman under the earth to have charge of the rise and fall of the tides. One time he wanted to learn about everything under the ocean and had this woman raise the water so that he could go there. He had it rise very slowly so that the people had time to load their canoes and get into them. When the tide had lifted them up between the mountains they could see bears and other wild animals walking around on the still unsubmerged tops. Many of the bears swam out to them, and at that time those who had their dogs had good protection. Some people walled the tops of the mountains about and tied their canoes inside. They could not take much wood up with them. Sometimes hunters see the rocks they piled up there, and at such times it begins to grow foggy. That was a very dangerous time. The people who survived could see trees swept up roots and all by the rush of waters and large devilfish and other creatures were carried up by it.” ref  

Click for more on the myth of Raven and the Tides: Tlingit myth about the origin of the tides.

Tlingit Raven Mythology

 “In the lore of Tlingit, Haida and other northern Native Americans a raven was both a trickster spirit and the creator of the world. The most interesting story about the raven in Tlingit folklore is the one concerning his responsibility for placement of the Sun in the sky.” ref 

“There are countless Raven stories in the Tlingit community, and there are many versions of how Raven came to bring the light to the world. The stories are not necessarily contradictory, but they do emphasize different points and have different details, depending on whom the caretaker of that story was and how he or she was taught to tell the story. Smarch described how angry Raven’s grandfather was when Raven released all of his treasures into the sky. In her telling, he gathered the pitch from all around the house, placed it into a bentwood box and threw it in the fire. Raven could not find the smoke hole and flew around in the black smoke, becoming the black bird we know today. Raven sacrificed his supernatural state of being in order to bring light to the world.” ref 

“In many versions of “Raven and the Box of Daylight” — including both ethnographic accounts and popular English versions of the story — at the beginning of his journey, Raven is white, one marker of his supernatural status. Tlingit scholar and professor Maria Williams wrote in her children’s book “How Raven Stole the Sun (Tales of the People)” that Raven was “pure white from the tips of his claws to the ends of his wings.” Hammond described Raven as a white or translucent being early on in his telling of the story. Depending on whom is telling the story, the details of how Raven became black differ, but the results are always the same. The story of “Raven and the Box of Daylight” contains messages and symbolism of hope, forgiveness, tolerance, love and sacrifice — messages and symbolism that encourage humans to be kinder toward each other.” ref 

“Early records suggest that the Tlingit believed in a creator, Kah-shu-goon-yah, whose name was sacred and never mentioned above a whisper. This primordial grandfather, or “divisible-rich-man,” controlled the sun, moon, stars, and daylight in addition to creating all living things. Little more is known of him. The sacred past centers upon Raven (cultural hero, benefactor, trickster, and rascal) who was credited with organizing the world in its present form and in initiating many Tlingit customs. Raven was never represented, symbolized, or made equal with the supreme being who transcended Tlingit legends. The Tlingit inhabited a world filled with spirits, or jek. These spirits could manifest their power through individuals, animals, or things.”

“Since every material object or physical force could be inhabited by a spirit, Tlingit were taught to respect everything in the universe. The penalty for disrespect was the loss of ability to obtain food. Properly purified persons could acquire spirit power for curing illnesses, for protection in warfare, for success in obtaining wealth, and for ceremonial prerogatives. Each Tlingit had a mortal and an immortal spirit. Spirits of the dead traveled to the appropriate level of heaven commensurate with their moral conduct in this life. Morally respectable people went to the highest heaven, Kiwa-a, a realm of happiness; moral delinquents went to a second level, or Dog Heaven, Ketl-kiwa, a place of torment. Individuals remained in the afterworld for a period of time and then returned to this world as a reincarnation of some deceased maternal relative.” ref 

“Tlingit legends have one great word in our culture: haa shageinyaa. This was a Great Spirit above us, and today we have translated that reverence to God.” ref

 “Wisakedjak (Wìsakedjàk in Algonquin, Wīsahkēcāhk(w) in Cree and Wiisagejaak in Oji-cree) is the Crane Manitou found in northern Algonquian and Dene storytelling, similar to the trickster Nanabozho in Ojibwa aadizookaanan (sacred stories), Inktonme in Assiniboine lore, and Coyote or Raven from many different tribes. His name is found in a number of different forms in the related languages and cultures he appears in, including Weesack-kachack, Wisagatcak, Wis-kay-tchach, Wissaketchak, Woesack-ootchacht, Vasaagihdzak, and Weesageechak. As with most mythological characters, Wisakedjak is used to explain the creation of animals or geographical locations. He is generally portrayed as being responsible for a great flood which destroyed the world. In other stories he is also one of the beings who created the current world, either on his own, or with magic given to him by the Creator for that specific purpose.” ref   

Blackfoot (Algonquian language) Native American Legends: Komorkis (Ko’komiki’somm)

“Komorkis is the Moon Goddesses, second eldest of the sacred Sky People. Komorkis is the wife of the sun god Natos and mother of the stars, of which the most important is Morning-Star. Komorkis is said to be the grandmother of several heroes of Blackfoot legend, such as Star-Boy.” ref

“Buga” Siberian Evenki Supreme God of Everything?

“One significant feature of the Evenki is that the supreme deities can be both male gods and female goddesses. According to traditional Evenk ideas, the Universe consists of three worlds: the upper (Ugu Buga), the middle (Doolin Buga), the lower (Hergu Buga). The upper world was located at sunrise, the lower at sunset. The upper and lower worlds are inaccessible to ordinary people and are inhabited by spirit gods. One of the main deities is Seveki spirit, whose function is the creator of all living things. The spirit of Enekan Buga monitors the life of people and animals, periodically visiting the earth. His assistant, Enekan Togo, is a spirit of fire living in a home. Through fire, the Evenki address spirits.” ref, ref

Nanabozho great spirit-being?

“Nanabozo is a supernatural being of various Indigenous oral traditions. He is the embodiment of life, with the power to create life in others. In some Anishinaabe and Cree stories, Nanabozo is a main player in the creation of Turtle Island. Nanabozho is a shapeshifter who is both zoomorphic as well as anthropomorphic, meaning that Nanabozho can take the shape of animals or humans in storytelling. Thus Nanabush takes many different forms in storytelling, often changing depending on the tribe. The majority of storytelling depicts Nanabozho through a zoomorphic lens. In the Arctic and sub-Arctic, the trickster is usually called Raven. Coyote is present in the area of California, Oregon, the inland plateau, the Great Basin, and the Southst and Southern Plains. Rabbit or Hare is the trickster figure in the Southeast, and Spider is in the northern plains. Meanwhile, Wolverine and Jay are the trickster in parts of Canada. Often, Nanabozho takes the shape of these animals because of their frequent presence among tribes. The animals listed above have similar behavioral patterns. The gender identity of Nanabozho changes depending on the storytelling. Because Nanabozho is a shapeshifter, they are androgynous. While the majority of stories told about the trickster figure are written with he/him pronouns, the gender identity changes depending on the story and many are written with feminine pronouns.” ref, ref

Puebloan Sky Father and Earth Mother?

Puebloan–Zuni: (Ápoyan Ta’chu) Sky Father and (Áwitelin Tsíta) Earth Mother

“The mist clouds formed into the Great Waters, where Earth Mother, Áwitelin Tsíta, and Sky Father, Ápoyan Ta’chu, formed, the two of whom conceived all men and creatures in the four-fold womb of the world. The Sun Father and Earth Mother then brought forth the Twin Children of the Sun, the twin brothers Ko’wituma and Wats’usi. These twins were endowed with sacred knowledge, caps, bows, arrows, and shields to have dominion over all men and creatures as Twin War Gods.” ref

Puebloan-Hopi: (Tawa) Sky Father and (Kokyangwuti) Earth Mother

“Tawa (the sun god) and Kokyangwuti/Spider Woman (Spider Grandmother) who is identified with the Earth Goddess. They separate themselves to create other lesser gods, then create the earth and its creatures.(close to the Zuni creation myth)” ref

Puebloan-Navajo: (TSOHANOAI) Sky Father and (Estsanatlehi) Earth Mother

“Estsanatlehi a Fertility goddess probably regarded as the most powerful deity in the Navaho pantheon is the consort of the Sun god TSOHANOAI and the mother of the war god NAYENEZGANI.” ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

“These ideas are my speculations from the evidence.”

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

C-M217 Na-Dene and Yeniseian Languages and Religion relatedness from Asia connecting to the Americas

Dené–Yeniseian language, Old Copper Complex, and Pre-Columbian Mound Builders?

ref

Genetic history of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas

“Indigenous American populations descend from an Ancient Paleo-Siberian population, itself a combination of an Ancient East Asian lineage which diverged from other East Asian peoples prior to the Last Glacial Maximum, between 36,000 and 25,000 years ago, and subsequently migrated into Siberia, where they merged with Ancient North Eurasians. They later dispersed throughout the Americas after about 16,000 years ago (exceptions being the Na-Dene and Eskimo–Aleut speaking groups, which are derived partially from Siberian populations which entered the Americas at a later time). A review article published in the Nature journal in 2021, which summarized the results of previous genomic studies, similarly concluded that all Indigenous Americans descended from the movement of people from Northeast Asia into the Americas.” ref

“Overall, the ‘Ancestral Native Americans’ formed from an ‘Ancient Paleo-Siberian‘ lineage which formed from the admixture between East Asian people and a distinct Paleolithic Siberian population known as Ancient North Eurasians, closer related to modern Europeans, giving rise to both Indigenous peoples of Siberia and Native Americans. Around 67% of the ancestry of Native Americans is derived from East Asian sources, while c. 33% is derived from an Ancient West Eurasian (ANE-like) source. A “Central Siberian” origin has been postulated for the paternal lineage of the source populations of the original migration into the Americas. Membership in haplogroups Q and C3b implies Indigenous American patrilineal descent.” ref

“A 2018 study analysed ancient Indigenous samples. The genetic evidence suggests that all Indigenous Americans ultimately descended from a founding population that combined East Asian and Ancient North Eurasian ancestry. The authors also provided evidence that the basal northern and southern Indigenous American branches, to which all other Indigenous peoples belong, diverged around 16,000 years ago. An Indigenous American sample from 16,000 BCE in Idaho, which is craniometrically similar to modern Indigenous Americans as well as Paleosiberians, was found to have been largely East-Eurasian genetically, and showed high affinity with contemporary East Asians, as well as Jōmon period samples of Japan, confirming that Ancestral Indigenous Americans split from an East-Eurasian source population somewhere in eastern Siberia.” ref

“Since the discovery of Q-M3, several subclades of M3-bearing populations have been discovered. An example is in South America, where some populations have a high prevalence of (SNP) M19, which defines subclade Q-M19. M19 has been detected in (59%) of Amazonian Ticuna men and in (10%) of Wayuu men. Subclade M19 appears to be unique to South American Indigenous peoples, arising 5,000 to 10,000 years ago. This suggests that population isolation, and perhaps even the establishment of tribal groups, began soon after migration into the South American areas. Other American subclades include Q-L54, Q-Z780, Q-MEH2, Q-SA01, and Q-M346 lineages. In Canada, two other lineages have been found. These are Q-P89.1 and Q-NWT01.” ref

“The Na-Dene, Inuit and Native Alaskan populations exhibit Haplogroup Q-M242; however, they are distinct from other Indigenous Americans with various mtDNA and atDNA mutations. This suggests that the peoples who first settled in the northern extremes of North America and Greenland derived from later migrant populations than those who penetrated farther south in the Americas. Linguists and biologists have reached a similar conclusion based on analysis of Indigenous American language groups and ABO blood group system distributions.” ref

“Haplogroup C-M217 is found mainly in Indigenous Siberians, Mongolians, and Kazakhs. Haplogroup C-M217 is the most widespread and frequently occurring branch of the greater (Y-DNA) haplogroup C-M130. Haplogroup C-M217 descendant C-P39 is most commonly found in today’s Na-Dene speakers, with the greatest frequency found among the Athabaskans at 42%, and at lesser frequencies in some other Indigenous American groups. This distinct and isolated branch C-P39 includes almost all the Haplogroup C-M217 Y-chromosomes found among all Indigenous peoples of the Americas.” ref

“Some researchers feel that this may indicate that the Na-Dene migration occurred from the Russian Far East after the initial Paleo-Indigenous American colonization, but prior to modern Inuit, Inupiat and Yupik expansions. In addition to in Na-Dene peoples, haplogroup C-P39 (C2b1a1a) is also found among other Indigenous Americans such as Algonquian– and Siouan-speaking populations. C-M217 is found among the Wayuu people of Colombia and Venezuela.” ref

“The Indigenous American populations show a lesser genetic diversity than populations from other continental regions. Observed is a decreasing genetic diversity as geographic distance from the Bering Strait occurs, as well as a decreasing genetic similarity to Siberian populations from Alaska (the genetic entry point). Also observed is evidence of a greater level of diversity and lesser level of population structure in western South America compared to eastern South America. There is a relative lack of differentiation between Mesoamerican and Andean populations, a scenario that implies that coastal routes (in this case along the coast of the Pacific Ocean) were easier for migrating peoples (more genetic contributors) to traverse in comparison with inland routes.” ref

“According to an autosomal genetic study from 2012, Indigenous Americans descend from at least three main migrant waves from East Asia. Most of it is traced back to a single ancestral population, called ‘First Americans’. However, those who speak Inuit languages from the Arctic inherited almost half of their ancestry from a second East Asian migrant wave. And those who speak Na-Dene, on the other hand, inherited a tenth of their ancestry from a third migrant wave. The initial settling of the Americas was followed by a rapid expansion southwards along the west coast, with little gene flow later, especially in South America. One exception to this are the Chibcha speakers of Colombia, whose ancestry comes from both North and South America. Linguistic studies have reinforced genetic studies, with relationships between languages found among those spoken in Siberia and those spoken in the Americas.” ref

“The common occurrence of the mtDNA Haplogroups A, B, C, and D among eastern Asian and Indigenous American populations has long been recognized, along with the presence of Haplogroup X. As a whole, the greatest frequency of the four Indigenous American associated haplogroups occurs in the Altai–Baikal region of southern Siberia. Some subclades of C and D closer to the Indigenous American subclades occur among Mongolian, Amur, Japanese, Korean, and Ainu populations. A 2023 DNA study found that “[i]n addition to previously described ancestral sources in Siberia, Australo-Melanesia, and Southeast Asia, … northern coastal China also contributed to the gene pool of Native Americans” as well as that of Japanese people.” ref

“Indigenous American haplogroups, including haplogroup X, are part of a single founding East Asian population. It also indicates that the distribution of mtDNA haplogroups and the levels of sequence divergence among linguistically similar groups were the result of multiple preceding migrations from Bering Straits populations. All Indigenous American mtDNA can be traced back to five haplogroups, A, B, C, D and X. More specifically, Indigenous American mtDNA belongs to sub-haplogroups A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, D1, and X2a (with minor groups C4c, D2a, and D4h3a).” ref 

“This suggests that 95% of Indigenous American mtDNA is descended from a minimal genetic founding female population, comprising sub-haplogroups A2, B2, C1b, C1c, C1d, and D1. The remaining 5% is composed of the X2a, D2a, C4c, and D4h3a sub-haplogroups. X is one of the five mtDNA haplogroups found in Indigenous Americans. Native Americans mostly belong to the X2a clade, which has never been found in the Old World. According to Jennifer Raff, X2a probably originated in the same Siberian population as the other four founding maternal lineages.” ref

“Haplogroup X genetic sequences diverged about 20,000 to 30,000 years ago to give two sub-groups, X1 and X2. X2’s subclade X2a occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current Indigenous population of the Americas. However, X2a is a major mtDNA subclade in North America; among the Algonquian peoples, it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types. It is also present in lower percentages to the west and south of this area — among the Sioux (15%), the Nuu-chah-nulth (11%–13%), the Navajo (7%), and the Yakama (5%). The predominant theory for sub-haplogroup X2a’s appearance in North America is migration along with A, B, C, and D mtDNA groups, from a source in the Altai Mountains of central Asia. Haplotype X6 was present in the Tarahumara 1.8% (1/53) and Huichol 20% (3/15).” ref

“The similarities in ages and geographical distributions for C4c and the previously analyzed X2a lineage provide support to the scenario of a dual origin for Paleo-Indigenous Americans. Taking into account that C4c is deeply rooted in the Asian portion of the mtDNA phylogeny and is indubitably of Asian origin, the finding that C4c and X2a are characterized by parallel genetic histories definitively dismisses the controversial hypothesis of an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America.” A 2016 genetic study of Indigenous peoples of the Amazonian region of Brazil (by Skoglund and Reich) showed evidence of admixture from a separate lineage of an otherwise unknown ancient people. This ancient group appears to be related to modern day “Australasian” peoples (i.e. Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians). This “Ghost population” was found in speakers of Tupian languages.” ref

ref

Prevalence of Y-SNP haplogroup C-M217 (C3*) around the Pacific Ocean. Light blue: previous studies; dark blue: present study; yellow: relative frequency of C-M217 (C3*) carriers. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Prevalence-of-Y-SNP-haplogroup-C-M217-C3-around-the-Pacific-Ocean-Light-blue_fig3_236207412

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

“Several linguists and geneticists suggest that the Uralic languages are related to various Siberian languages and possibly also some languages of northern Native Americans. A proposed family is named Uralo-Siberian, it includes Uralic, Yukaghir, Eskimo–Aleut (Inuit), possibly Nivkh, and Chukotko-Kamchatkan. Haplogroup Q is found in nearly all Native Americans and nearly all of the Yeniseian Ket people (90%).” ref, ref

You can find some form of Shamanism, among Uralic, Transeurasian, Dené–Yeniseian, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, and Eskaleut languages.

My speculations of shamanism are its dispersals, after 24,000 to 4,000 years ago, seem to center on Lake Baikal and related areas. To me, the hotspot of Shamanism goes from west of Lake Baikal in the “Altai Mountains” also encompassing “Lake Baikal” and includes the “Amur Region/Watershed” east of Lake Baikal as the main location Shamanism seems to have radiated out from. 

Shamanism Among the Peoples of the North: Uralic, Transeurasian, Dené–Yeniseian, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, and Eskaleut languages

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

California-Peruvian connection

“The Cell study also revealed a surprising connection between ancient people living in California’s Channel Islands and the southern Peruvian Andes at least 4,200 years ago. It appears that these two geographically distant groups have a shared ancestry, the researchers found. It’s unlikely that people living in the Channel Islands actually traveled south to Peru, the researchers said. Rather, it’s possible that these groups’ ancestors sallied forth thousands of years earlier, with some ending up in the Channel Islands and others in South America. But those genes didn’t become common in Peru until much later, around 4,200 years ago, when the population may have exploded, the researchers said. It could be that this ancestry arrived in South America thousands of years before and we simply don’t have earlier individuals showing it,” study co-lead researcher Nathan Nakatsuka, a research assistant in the Reich lab at Harvard Medical School, said in the statement. “There is archaeological evidence that the population in the Central Andes area greatly expanded after around 5,000 years ago. Spreads of particular subgroups during these events may be why we detect this ancestry afterward.” ref

ref

Shamanistic and Animistic Cultures map by “The Shamanism Magazine” (http://SacredHoop.org)

https://sacredhoop.org/Free-Guide-To-Shamanism/Sacred-Hoop-Free-Guide-To-Shamanism.pdf

https://vebuka.com/print/171116090613-9bd8504b25af4f7e2fe52d3cfe620241/quotSACRED_HOOPquot_GUIDE_TO_SHAMANISM

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Postglacial genomes from foragers across Northern Eurasia reveal prehistoric

mobility associated with the spread of the Uralic and Yeniseian languages

Abstract

“The North Eurasian forest and forest-steppe zones have sustained millennia of sociocultural connections among northern peoples. We present genome-wide ancient DNA data for 181 individuals from this region spanning the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Bronze Age. We find that Early to Mid-Holocene hunter-gatherer populations from across the southern forest and forest-steppes of Northern Eurasia can be characterized by a continuous gradient of ancestry that remained stable for millennia, ranging from fully West Eurasian in the Baltic region to fully East Asian in the Transbaikal region. In contrast, cotemporaneous groups in far Northeast Siberia were genetically distinct, retaining high levels of continuity from a population that was the primary source of ancestry for Native Americans. By the mid-Holocene, admixture between this early Northeastern Siberian population and groups from Inland East Asia and the Amur River Basin produced two distinctive populations in eastern Siberia that played an important role in the genetic formation of later people. Ancestry from the first population, Cis-Baikal Late Neolithic-Bronze Age (Cisbaikal_LNBA), is found substantially only among Yeniseian-speaking groups and those known to have admixed with them. Ancestry from the second, Yakutian Late Neolithic-Bronze Age (Yakutia_LNBA), is strongly associated with present-day Uralic speakers. We show how Yakutia_LNBA ancestry spread from an east Siberian origin ~4.5kya, along with subclades of Y-chromosome haplogroup N occurring at high frequencies among present-day Uralic speakers, into Western and Central Siberia in communities associated with Seima-Turbino metallurgy: a suite of advanced bronze casting techniques that spread explosively across an enormous region of Northern Eurasia ~4.0kya. However, the ancestry of the 16 Seima-Turbino-period individuals–the first reported from sites with this metallurgy–was otherwise extraordinarily diverse, with partial descent from Indo-Iranian-speaking pastoralists and multiple hunter-gatherer populations from widely separated regions of Eurasia. Our results provide support for theories suggesting that early Uralic speakers at the beginning of their westward dispersal where involved in the expansion of Seima-Turbino metallurgical traditions, and suggests that both cultural transmission and migration were important in the spread of Seima-Turbino material culture.” ref

Haplogroup N from China to Fennoscandia: Migrations and Relationship of Language (Dene-Yeniseian and Uralic), DNA, and Cultures

Pic ref, ref

Bridging the Boreal Forest: Siberian Archaeology and the Emergence of Pottery among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers of Northern Eurasia

• Globalization and the Emergence of Ceramic-using Hunter-gatherers in Northern Eurasia
• A comparative perspective on the ‘western’ and ‘eastern’ Neolithics of Eurasia: Ceramics; agriculture and sedentism
• The transmission of pottery technology among prehistoric European hunter-gatherers

“The oldest pottery of northern Europe, eastern North America, and Central America occurs in shell mounds.” ref

“As of 2012, the earliest pottery vessels found anywhere in the world, dating to 20,000 to 19,000 years before the present, was found at Xianrendong Cave in the Jiangxi province of China. Other early pottery vessels include those excavated from the Yuchanyan Cave in southern China, dated from 16,000 BCE, and those found in the Amur River basin in the Russian Far East, dated from 14,000 BCE. The Odai Yamamoto I site, belonging to the Jōmon period, currently has the oldest pottery in Japan, with earthenware fragments that have been dated as early as 14,500 BCE.” ref

“Most evidence points to an independent development of pottery in the Native American cultures (but since the people migrated from Siberia several times I think they already knew about pottery from Siberia before coming to the Americas), with the earliest known dates from Brazil, from 9,500 to 5,000 years ago and 7,000 to 6,000 years ago. Further north in Mesoamerica, dates begin with the Archaic Era (3500–2000 BCE), and into the Formative period (2000 BCE – CE 200). These cultures did not develop the stoneware, porcelain or glazes found in the Old World. Maya ceramics include finely painted vessels, usually beakers, with elaborate scenes with several figures and texts. Several cultures, beginning with the Olmec, made terracotta sculpture, and sculptural pieces of humans or animals that are also vessels are produced in many places, with Moche portrait vessels among the finest.” ref

Ceramics of Indigenous peoples of the Americas

“Ceramics of Indigenous peoples of the Americas is an art form with at least a 7500-year history in the Americas. Pottery is fired ceramics with clay as a component. Ceramics are used for utilitarian cooking vessels, serving and storage vessels, pipes, funerary urns, censers, musical instruments, ceremonial items, masks, toys, sculptures, and a myriad of other art forms. Due to their resilience, ceramics have been key to learning more about pre-Columbian Indigenous cultures. Not all Indigenous American pottery requires added tempers; some Hopi potters use pure kaolin clay that does not require tempering.” ref

“The choice of temper used in ceramics was constrained by what was available, but changes in the choice of temper can provide clues to influence and trade relations between groups. Shell-tempered ware was produced sporadically in various places across the eastern United States, but in the late Woodland and early Mississippian periods it became the predominant temper used across much of the Mississippi Valley and middle gulf coast, and a major defining characteristic of Mississippian culture pottery.” ref

“The earliest ceramics known from the Americas have been found in the lower Amazon Basin. Ceramics from the Caverna da Pedra Pintada, near Santarém, Brazil, have been dated to between 7,500 and 5,000 years ago. Ceramics from Taperinha, also near Santarém, have been dated to 8,000 to 7,000 years ago. Some of the sherds at Taperinho were shell-tempered, which allowed the sherds themselves to be radiocarbon dated. These first ceramics-making cultures were fishers and shellfish-gatherers.” ref

“Ceramics appeared next across northern South America and then down the western side of South America and northward through Mesoamerica. Ceramics of the Alaka culture in Guyana have been dated to 6,000 to 4,500 years ago. The pottery tradition at Pedra Pintada in Brazil represents the oldest known ceramics in the Americas. Dating back to 5630 BCE, this same tradition continued for 2500 years. Ceramics of the San Jacinto culture in Colombia have been dated to about 4530 BCE, and at Puerto Hormiga, also in Colombia, to about 3794 BCE. Ceramics appeared in the Valdivia culture in Ecuador around 3200 BCE, and in the Pandanche culture in Peru around 2460 BCE.” ref

“The spread of ceramics in Mesoamerica came later. Ceramics from Monagrillo in Panama have been dated to around 2140 BCE, from Tronadora in Costa Rica to around 1890 BCE, and from Barra in the Soconusco of Chiapas to around 1900 BCE. Ceramics of the Purrón tradition in southcentral Mexico have been dated to around 1805 BCE, and from the Chajil tradition of northcentral Mexico, to around 1600 BCE.” ref

“The appearance of ceramics in the Southeastern United States does not fit the above pattern. Ceramics from the middle Savannah River in Georgia and South Carolina (known as Stallings, Stallings Island, or St. Simons) have been dated to about 2888 BCE (around 4,888 years ago), and ceramics of the Orange and Norwood cultures in northern Florida to around 2460 BCE (or around 4,460 years ago) (all older than any other dated ceramics from north of Colombia). Ceramics appeared later elsewhere in North America. Ceramics reached southern Florida (Mount Elizabeth) by 4000 years ago, Nebo Hill (in Missouri) by 3700 years ago, and Poverty Point (in Louisiana) by 3400 years ago.” ref

“Fiber-tempered ceramics associated with shell middens left by hunter-fisher-gatherers of the Early Northwest South American Literature appeared at sites such as Puerto Hormiga, Monsú, Puerto Chacho, and San Jacinto in Colombia by 3100 BCE. Fiber-tempered ceramics at Monsú have been dated to 5940 radiocarbon years before present. The fiber-tempered pottery at Puerto Hormiga was “crude”, formed from a single lump of clay. The fiber-tempered pottery at San Jacinto is described as “well-made”. Sand-tempered coiled ceramics have also been found at Puerto Horrible.” ref

“Fiber-tempered ceramics associated with shell middens left by Late Archaic hunter-fisher-gatherers appeared in the Atlantic coastal plain of Florida, Georgia and South Carolina starting in 2500 BCE. The earliest attested pottery is in the Stallings culture area, around the middle Savannah River. Fiber-tempered pottery of the Orange culture in northeast Florida has been dated to 2000 BC or a bit earlier.” ref 

“The earliest ceramics in the Andean area have been radiocarbon dated to about 1800 BCE, although according to John H. Rowe the date may go back even to 2100 BC. Early ceramics have been found on the central coast at the large settlement of Las Haldas, at Huarmey, as well as at some other sites in the Casma River region, and in Lima area. Fiber-tempered pottery of very similar form spread along coasts and river valleys of the Southeastern United States from the Atlantic coast into Alabama, reaching northwestern Florida (Norwood culture) and the Gulf coast by 1300 BCE, the interior Middle South by 1100, and Poverty Point by 1000 BCE.” ref

“The Tiwanaku and Wari cultures shared dominance of the Andes, roughly from 500 to 1000 BCE. The Tiwanaku civilizations originated in Lake Titicaca region of Bolivia, and a staff-bearing deity figured largely in their artwork. Tiwanaku artists continued the tradition of naturalistic, ceramic portrait vessels. The ubiquitous Wari ceramics carried over imagery from their textiles and metalwork, such as llama and alpaca imagery.” ref

• Hopewell pottery is the ceramic tradition of the various local cultures involved in the Hopewell tradition (ca. 200 BCE to 400 CE) and are found as artifacts in archeological sites in the American Midwest and Southeast.
• Mississippian culture pottery is the ceramic tradition of the Mississippian culture (800–1600 CE) found as artifacts in archaeological sites in the American Midwest and Southeast.” ref

“The similarities of the Stallings series ceramics to the earlier Puerto Hormiga ceramics of Colombia, which were both associated with shell rings, and the presence of winds and ocean currents favoring journeys from South America to the Southeastern United States, led James A. Ford, among other archaeologists, to offer the hypothesis that the two areas had connections, and that the technology of fiber-tempered ceramics in the southeastern United States had been imported from Colombia. Other archaeologists have noted that there are no known archaeological sites between Colombia and Florida that are of a type or age consistent with such connections, and that the cultural traditions of the Southeastern United States show no significant changes associated with the appearance of ceramics, indicating that there was no migration or people, and no transfer of technology or other elements of culture, other than the appearance of ceramics.” ref

“Later significant developments in ceramics in the Southeastern Woodlands included Mississippian culture pottery in the Mississippi River valley, and Weedon Island pottery, a style of pottery used primarily in ceremonial contexts and high status burials, produced and traded along the Gulf of Mexico coast from southwestern Florida to the Florida panhandle.” ref

Mesoamerican pottery

• Barra/Mokaya (c. 1900 BCE)
• Tlatilco (c. 1500 BCE)
• Olmec (c. 1500–400 BCE)
• Teotihuacan (c. 300 BCE – 600 CE)
• Zapotec (c. 200–800 CE)
• Mixtec(c. 900 CE)
• Purépecha (c. 800–1300 CE)
• Maya ceramics (c. 317–1200 CE)
• Remojadas (c. 750 CE)
• Toltec / Mayan (c. 1200–1500 CE)
• Aztec (c. 1168–1519 CE)
• Coclé, Panama with the following periods: La Mula (c. 150 BCE – 300 CE), Tonosi (c. 300–550 CE), Cubita (c. 550–700 CE), and Gran Cocle (c. 1200–1500 CE).
• Classic Veracruz Culture (c. 100–1000 CE)
• Capacha (c. 1500 BCE to 1000 BCE)
• Western Mexico shaft tomb tradition (c. 300 BCE to 550 CE) ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

“The shaman is, above all, a connecting figure, bridging several worlds for his people, traveling between this world, the underworld, and the heavens. He transforms himself into an animal and talks with ghosts, the dead, the deities, and the ancestors. He dies and revives. He brings back knowledge from the shadow realm, thus linking his people to the spirits and places which were once mythically accessible to all.–anthropologist Barbara Meyerhoff” ref

ref

“Haplogroup N is the ancestral haplogroup to almost all clades today distributed in Europe and Oceania, as well as many found in Asia and the Americas.” ref

Sami Shamanism: Religio-Sociocultural Identity, Phenomenon, and System 

Ainu people, Sámi people, Native Americans, the Ancient North Eurasians, and Paganistic-Shamanism with Totemism

Sacred Land, Hills, and Mountains: Sami Mythology (Paganistic Shamanism)

Sami and the Northern Indigenous Peoples Landscape, Language, and its Connection to Religion

Pic ref

Ancient Women Found in a Russian Cave Turn Out to Be Closely Related to The Modern Population https://www.sciencealert.com/ancient-women-found-in-a-russian-cave-turn-out-to-be-closely-related-to-the-modern-population

Abstract

“Ancient genomes have revolutionized our understanding of Holocene prehistory and, particularly, the Neolithic transition in western Eurasia. In contrast, East Asia has so far received little attention, despite representing a core region at which the Neolithic transition took place independently ~3 millennia after its onset in the Near East. We report genome-wide data from two hunter-gatherers from Devil’s Gate, an early Neolithic cave site (dated to ~7.7 thousand years ago) located in East Asia, on the border between Russia and Korea. Both of these individuals are genetically most similar to geographically close modern populations from the Amur Basin, all speaking Tungusic languages, and, in particular, to the Ulchi. The similarity to nearby modern populations and the low levels of additional genetic material in the Ulchi imply a high level of genetic continuity in this region during the Holocene, a pattern that markedly contrasts with that reported for Europe.” ref

“Six of seven individuals whose remains have been recovered from the cave have been DNA tested. Originally, three of the specimens were thought to be adult males, two were thought to be adult females, one was thought to be a sub-adult of about 12-13 years of age, and one was thought to be a juvenile of about 6-7 years of age based on the skeletal morphology of the remains. Results of genetic analysis of the sub-adult individual have not yet been published. However, two specimens, NEO236 (Skull B, DevilsGate2) and NEO235 (Skull G), who had been presumed to be adult males according to a forensic morphological assessment of their remains, were discovered through genetic analysis to actually be females. The juvenile specimen also has been determined to be female through genetic analysis. Three of the specimens (including the only adult male plus NEO235/Skull G and another adult female, labeled as Skull Е, DevilsGate1, or NEO240, who has been genetically determined to be a first-degree relative of NEO235/Skull G) have been assigned to mtDNA haplogroup D4m; a previous genetic analysis of one of these adult female specimens determined her mtDNA haplogroup to be D4. Another three specimens (including the juvenile female, the DevilsGate2 specimen, and another adult female; both the juvenile female and the DevilsGate2 specimen have been determined to be first-degree relatives of the other adult female, and the juvenile female and the DevilsGate2 specimen also have been determined to be second-degree relatives of each other) have been assigned to haplogroup D4; a previous genetic analysis of the DevilsGate2 specimen determined her mtDNA haplogroup to be M. The only specimen from the cave who has been confirmed to be male through genetic analysis has been assigned to Y-DNAhaplogroup C2b-F6273/Y6704/Y6708, equivalent to C2b-L1373, the northern (Central Asian, Siberian, and indigenous American) branch of haplogroup C2-M217.” ref

“The haplogroup C-M217 is now found at high frequencies among Central Asian peoples, indigenous Siberians, and some Native peoples of North America. Haplogroup C-M217 is the modal haplogroup among Mongolians and most indigenous populations of the Russian Far East, such as the Buryats, Northern Tungusic peoples, Nivkhs, Koryaks, and Itelmens. The subclade C-P39 is common among males of the indigenous North American peoples whose languages belong to the Na-Dené phylum. C2b1a1a P39 Canada,USA(Found in several indigenous peoples of North America, including some Na-Dené-,Algonquian-, orSiouan-speaking populations).” ref

“Males carrying C-M130 are believed to have migrated to the Americas some 6,000-8,000 years ago, and was carried by Na-Dené-speaking peoples into the northwest Pacific coast of North America. The distribution of Haplogroup C-M130 is generally limited to populations of Siberia, parts of East Asia, Oceania, and the Americas. Haplogroup C2 (M217) – the most numerous and widely dispersed C lineage – was once believed to have originated in Central Asia, spread from there into Northern Asia and the Americas while other theory it originated from East Asia. C-M217 stretches longitudinally from Central Europe and Turkey, to the Wayuu people of Colombia and Venezuela, and latitudinally from the Athabaskan peoples of Alaska to Vietnam to the Malay Archipelago. The highest frequencies of Haplogroup C-M217 are found among the populations of Mongolia and Far East Russia, where it is the modal haplogroup. Haplogroup C-M217 is the only variety of Haplogroup C-M130 to be found among Native Americans, among whom it reaches its highest frequency in Na-Dené populations.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref

“This is off your subject but natural mounds, hills, and mountains were also important to many tribes. The Cheyenne and Lakota held The Black Hills to be sacred and unbeknownst to them there was gold underneath. So the Lakota have a creation story of falling through a hole in the Big Dipper after living among the Pleiades and then after they fell to Earth somehow they emerged through Wind Cave. This is something not all Oceti Sakowin agree on because they were once part of the Dakota who were farther east. There are no ceremonies held at Wind Cave so it’s not considered as holy as places such as Bear Butte. The Cheyenne were pushed farther west although they remained allies and I have Northern Cheyenne friends who travel for a ceremony to Bear Butte to this day. Whether they could feel ley lines under the ground and thought that was a sign of a power vortex or what pre-colonization, is unknown. I believe that there were 2 separate groups of people who migrated here to these continents and some arrived in South America and some came over the Bering Strait. The most recent being the Alaskan Natives. However, tribes like the Cherokee although under colonization are considered part of the Five Civilized Tribes- that only meant that they accepted conversion to Christianity. They are Iroquoian language stock and separate from the rest of the Muskogean speakers in the southeast. Their DNA is different from most other tribes as well. Anyway, these tribes were part of successive waves after the last glacial maximum and the long period of time it took for the ice to retreat. There are people who say that they have been in the Dakotas for time immemorial which is a term I deeply hate…but those areas were covered with ice and then huge lakes.” – Mellodi Zintkala @MZintkala Hunkpapa Lakota Ina~Unci

Sacred Mounds, Mountains, Kurgans, and Pyramids may hold deep Mythology connections?

Who were the Groups migrating and merging with the previous Groups of Europe 9,000 to 7,000 years ago?

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Swing of the Mace: the rise of Elite, Forced Authority, and Inequality begin to Emerge 8,500 years ago?

“8,000-Year-Old Fortress Discovered In Siberia Is World’s Oldest. The prehistoric fort hints at inter-group violence between hunter-gatherers. The fact that this Stone Age fort was built by hunter-gatherers is transforming our understanding of ancient human societies. Archaeologists have long associated fortresses with permanent agricultural settlements. However, this cluster of fortified structures reveals that prehistoric groups were constructing protective edifices much earlier than originally thought. Recent excavations at the site have revealed the existence of ten “house pits”, surrounded by a series of banks and ditches that enclose the tip of the promontory. Identified remains of wooden palisades, indicating that the site was probably surrounded by a defensive wall. A second set of ten house pits were also discovered just outside the fortress, suggesting a hierarchical structure involving a fortified inner area and an unprotected outer section. Radiocarbon dating estimates obtained from one of the palisades and charcoal found in a ditch indicate that the fortress was initially constructed in the final century of the seventh millennium BCE. However, stratigraphic evidence from the house pits suggests that the site was repeatedly burned to the ground, hinting at the existence of violent conflict in the region 8,000 years ago.” ref, ref 

• Paganism: Goddesses around 12,000 years ago then Male Gods after 7,000 years ago
• Between 7,000-5,000 Years ago, rise of unequal hierarchy elite, leading to a “birth of the State” or worship of power, strong new sexism, oppression of non-elites, and the fall of Women’s equal status
• Paganism 7,000-5,000 years old: related to “Anarchism and Socialism” (Capitalism) (World War 0) Elite and their slaves!
• The First Expression of the Male God around 7,000 years ago?
• First Human-Male God was Created in the Balkans around or after 7,000 years ago following Harsher climate, Emerging social hierarchy, and Fear of violence
• White (light complexion skin) Bigotry and Sexism started 7,000 years ago?
• The rise of Male Gods as well as Men around 7,000 to 5,000 years ago and the Lowering of Goddesses as well as Women/Trans/Non-binary
• Hell and Underworld mythologies starting maybe as far back as 7,000 to 5,000 years ago with the Proto-Indo-Europeans?
• Agriculture religion (Paganism) with farming reached Britain between about 7,000 to 6,500 or so years ago and seemingly expressed in things like Western Europe’s Long Barrows

ref, ref, ref, ref

Kurgan Hypothesis

“The Kurgan hypothesis (also known as the Kurgan theory or Kurgan model) or Steppe theory is the most widely accepted proposal to identify the Proto-Indo-European homeland from which the Indo-European languages spread out throughout Europe and parts of Asia. It postulates that the people of a Kurgan culture in the Pontic steppe north of the Black Sea were the most likely speakers of the Proto-Indo-European language (PIE). The term is derived from the Russian kurgan (курга́н), meaning tumulus or burial mound. The Steppe theory was first formulated by Otto Schrader (1883) and V. Gordon Childe (1926), then systematized in the 1950s by Marija Gimbutas, who used the term to group various prehistoric cultures, including the Yamnaya (or Pit Grave) culture and its predecessors. In the 2000s, David Anthony instead used the core Yamnaya culture and its relationship with other cultures as a point of reference.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Masseboth similar but much smaller than a European Menhir, dates to around 13,000-11,000 years ago in the Near East. Kurgan a burial mound over a timber burial chamber, dates to around 7,000/6,000 years ago. Dolmen a single-chamber ritual megalith, dates to around 7,000/6,000 years ago. Ziggurat a multi-platform temple around 4,900 years ago. Pyramid a multi-platform tomb, dates to around 4,700 years ago. #3 is a Step Pyramid (or proto pyramid) for the burial of Pharaoh Djoser it went through several revisions and redevelopments. First are three layers of Mastaba “house of eternity” a flat-roofed rectangular structure, then two step pyramid one on top the other, showing the evolution of ideas.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref 

Religious/Ritual Ideas, including goddesses and gods as well as ritual mounds or pyramids from Northeastern Asia at least 6,000 years old, seemingly filtering to Iran, Iraq, the Mediterranean, Europe, Egypt, and the Americas?

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

6,720 to 4,920 years old Ritualistic Hongshan Culture of Inner Mongolia with 5,000-year-old Pyramid Mounds and Temples

• Millet agriculture dispersed from Northeast China to the Russian Far East: Integrating archaeology, genetics, and linguistics
• Language dispersals associated with millet farming in Neolithic Northeast Asia: “Hongshan Neolithic Culture”
• The Development of Complexity in Prehistoric Northern China: “Hongshan Neolithic Culture”
• Hongshan Neolithic Culture of China
• 5,000-year-old “Pyramid” Found in Inner Mongolia

• 6,720 to 4,920 years old Ritualistic Hongshan Culture of Inner Mongolia with 5,000-year-old Pyramid Mounds and Temples
• Ritual, Religion, Elites, Language, and Civilization relating to Neolithic and Ancient China
• China’s Civilization between 5,000-3,000 years ago, was a time of war and class struggle, violent transition from free clans to a Slave or Elite society

Investigating Asian Shamanism: “Wu” (Chinese shaman) and (Chinese shamanism) “Wuism” or “Wu” religion as well as Others to Understand

6,720 to 4,920 years old Ritualistic Hongshan Culture of Inner Mongolia with 5,000-year-old Pyramid Mounds and Temples

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

I don’t think they crossed the Atlantic Ocean across the water but by land going both directions from Asia west to Europe as well as east crossing the Bering Strait, between Asia and The Americas.

PNAS February 26, 2019,  Radiocarbon dates and Bayesian modeling support maritime diffusion model for megaliths in Europe 

“There are ∼35,000 presently extant European megaliths, a term which is derived from Greek μέγας (mégas), “big,” and λίϑος (líthos), “stone.” These include megalithic tombs, standing stones, stone circles, alignments, and megalithic buildings or temples. Most of these were constructed during the Neolithic and the Copper Ages and are located in coastal areas. Their distribution is along the so-called Atlantic façade, including Sweden, Denmark, North Germany, The Netherlands, Belgium, Scotland, England, Wales, Ireland, northwest France, northern Spain, and Portugal, and in the Mediterranean region, including southern and southeastern Spain, southern France, the Islands of Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Malta and the Balearics, Apulia, northern Italy, and Switzerland. Interestingly, they share similar or even identical architectonic features throughout their distribution. Megalithic graves were built as dolmens and as passage or gallery graves. Thousands of anthropogenic erected stones either stand isolated in the landscapes or were arranged as circles or in rows. There is evidence all across Europe for an orientation of the graves toward the east or southeast in the direction of the rising Sun. The question therefore arises whether there was a single, original source from which a megalithic movement spread over Europe or regional phenomena developed independently due to a similar set of conditions.” ref 

“According to study was conducted by Bettina Schulz Paulsson, a prehistoric archaeologist at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, European megaliths can be traced back to a single hunter-gatherer culture that originated nearly 7,000 years ago in what’s today the Brittany region of northwestern France.” ref 

“From 10,000-8,000 years ago, Sweden as a whole became populated by people who lived by hunting, gathering and fishing, and who used simple stone tools. Dwelling places and graves dating from the Stone Age, lasting until about 3,800 years ago, are found today in increasing numbers. The Bronze Age was marked in the Nordic region – especially in Denmark but also in Sweden – by a high level of culture, shown by the artifacts found in graves. After 2,500 years ago, such artifacts become increasingly rare as iron came into more general use. During the early Iron Age, the population of Sweden became settled, and agriculture came to form the basis of the economy and society.” ref 

ref

“Haplogroup X is found in approximately 2% of native Europeans, and 13% of all native North Americans. Subclade X2 appears to have undergone extensive population expansion and dispersal around or soon after the Last Glacial Maximum, roughly 20,000 years ago. It is more strongly represented in the Near East, the Caucasus, and southern Europe, and somewhat less strongly present in the rest of Europe. The highest concentrations are found in the Ojibwe (25%), Sioux (15%), Nuu-Chah-Nulth (12%), Georgia (8%), Orkney (7%), and amongst the Druze Assyrian community in Israel (27%). Subclades of X2 are not present in South Americans Amerindian populations. The oldest known human associated with X2 is Kennewick Man, whose c. 9000-year old remains were discovered in Washington State. Fossils excavated at the Late Neolithic site of Kelif el Boroud in Morocco, which have been dated to around 5,000 years old, have also been found to carry the X2 subclade. In Eurasia, the greatest frequency of haplogroup X is observed in the Druze, a minority population in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, as much in X1 (16%) as in X2 (11%).” ref

Haplogroup X – found most often in Western Eurasia, but also present in the Americas.

• • Haplogroup X1 – found primarily in North Africa as well as in some populations of the Levant, notably among the Druze
  • Haplogroup X2 – found in Western Eurasia, Siberia, and among Native Americans. ref

“Haplogroup X is also one of the five haplogroups found in the indigenous peoples of the Americas. (namely, X2a subclade). Although it occurs only at a frequency of about 3% for the total current indigenous population of the Americas, it is a bigger haplogroup in northern North America, where among the Algonquian peoples it comprises up to 25% of mtDNA types. It is also present in lesser percentages to the west and south of this area—among the Sioux (15%), the Nuu-chah-nulth (11%–13%), the Navajo (7%), and the Yakama (5%). In Latin America, Haplotype X6 was present in the Tarahumara 1.8% (1/53) and Huichol 20% (3/15) X6 and X7 was also found in 12% in Yanomani people.” ref

“Unlike the four main Native American mtDNA haplogroups (A, B, C, D), X is not strongly associated with East Asia. The main occurrence of X in Asia discovered so far is in the Altai people in Siberia. One theory of how the X Haplogroup ended up in North America is that the people carrying it migrated from central Asia along with haplogroups A, B, C, and D, from an ancestor from the Altai Region of Central Asia. Two sequences of haplogroup X2 were sampled further east of Altai among the Evenks of Central Siberia. These two sequences belong to X2* and X2b. It is uncertain if they represent a remnant of the migration of X2 through Siberia or a more recent input.” ref

“New World lineages X2a and X2g are not derived from the Old World lineages X2b, X2c, X2d, X2e, and X2f, indicating an early origin of the New World lineages “likely at the very beginning of their expansion and spread from the Near East”. A 2008 study came to the conclusion that the presence of haplogroup X in the Americas does not support migration from Solutrean-period Europe. The lineage of haplogroup X in the Americas is not derived from a European subclade, but rather represent an independent subclade, labelled X2a. The X2a subclade has not been found in Eurasia, and has most likely arisen within the early Paleo-Indian population, at roughly 13,000 years ago. A basal variant of X2a was found in the Kennewick Man fossil (ca. 9,000 years ago).” ref

ref

Haplogroup X in China, Egypt, North Africa, Caucasus, Central Asia, and European alludes to shared connected similarities and in ideas or behaviors.

ref

“The genetic sequences of haplogroup X diverged originally from haplogroup N, and subsequently further diverged about 20,000 to 30,000 years ago to give two sub-groups, X1 and X2. Overall haplogroup X accounts for about 2% of the population of Europe, the Near East, and North Africa. Sub-group X1 is much less numerous, and restricted to North and East Africa, and also the Near East. Sub-group X2 appears to have undergone extensive population expansion and dispersal around or soon after the last glacial maximum, about 21,000 years ago. It is more strongly present in the Near East, the Caucasus, and Mediterranean Europe; and somewhat less strongly present in the rest of Europe. Particular concentrations appear in Georgia (8%), the Orkney Islands (in Scotland) (7%), and amongst the Israeli Druze community (26%); the last presumably due to a founder effect. Subclades X2a and X2g are found in North America, but are not present in Native Latin Americans.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

4,320-3,820 years old “Shimao” (North China) site with Totemistic-Shamanistic Paganism and a Stepped Pyramid

      Shimao pyramid: ‘Pyramid of eyes’ at heart of 4300-year-old city

A 4,300-year-old city, which has a massive step pyramid that is at least 230 feet (70 meters) high and spans 59 acres (24 hectares) at its base, has been excavated in China. The pyramid was decorated with eye symbols and “anthropomorphic,” or part-human, part-animal faces. Those figures “may have endowed the stepped pyramid with special religious power and further strengthened the general visual impression on its large audience,” the archaeologists wrote in the article. The pyramid contains 11 steps, each of which was lined with stone. On the topmost step, there “were extensive palaces built of rammed earth, with wooden pillars and roofing tiles, a gigantic water reservoir. The city’s rulers lived in these palaces, and art and craft production were carried out nearby. The stepped pyramid complex seems to possibly have functioned not only as a residential space for ruling Shimao elites, but also as a space for artisanal or industrial craft production. Shimao is a Neolithic site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi, China. The site in located in the northern part of the Loess Plateau, on the southern edge of the Ordos Desert. Unusual features include jade embedded in the city walls, possibly to provide spiritual protection, and paintings of geometrical patterns on the inner walls. Many human skulls were found under the city gate, suggesting ritual sacrifices during construction. For five centuries, a city flourished around the pyramid. At one time, the city encompassed an area of 988 acres (400 hectares), making it one of the largest in the world, the archaeologists wrote. Today, the ruins of the city are called “Shimao,” but its name in ancient times is unknown. A series of stone walls with ramparts and gates were built around the pyramid and the city. “At the entrance to the stepped pyramid were sophisticated bulwarks [defensive walls] whose design suggests that they were intended to provide both defense and highly restricted access. The remains of numerous human sacrifices have been discovered at Shimao. “In the outer gateway of the eastern gate on the outer rampart alone, six pits containing decapitated human heads. Some of the victims may be from another archaeological site called Zhukaigou, which is located to the north of Shimao, and the people of Shimao may have conquered the neighboring site. “Morphological analysis of the human remains suggests that the victims may have been related to the residents of Zhukaigou, which could further suggest that they were taken to Shimao as captives during the expansion of the Shimao polity,” the study said. While archaeologists have known about Shimao for many years, it was once thought to be part of the Great Wall of China, a section of which is located nearby. It wasn’t until excavations were carried out in recent years that archaeologists realized that Shimao is far older than the Great Wall, which was built between 2,700 and 400 years ago. ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref, ref

The Mound Builders: The Poverty Point, Adena, Hopewell, and Mississippian Cultures

Ancient DNA from the Schild site in Illinois: Implications for the Mississippian transition in the Lower Illinois River Valley

ABSTRACT

“Archaeologists have long debated whether rapid cultural change in the archaeological record is due to in situ developments, migration of a new group into the region, or the spread of new cultural practices into an area through existing social networks, with the local peoples adopting and adapting practices from elsewhere as they see fit (acculturation). Researchers have suggested each of these explanations for the major cultural transition that occurred at the beginning of the Mississippian period (AD 1050) across eastern North America. In this study, we used ancient DNA to test competing hypotheses of migration and acculturation for the culture change that occurred between the Late Woodland (AD 400–1050) and Mississippian (AD 1050–1500) periods in the Lower Illinois River Valley. We obtained sequences of the first hypervariable segment of the mitochondrial genome (mtDNA) from 39 individuals (17 Late Woodland, 22 Mississippian) interred in the Schild cemetery in western Illinois, and compared these lineages to ancient mtDNA lineages present at other sites in the region. Computer simulations were used to test a null hypothesis of population continuity from Late Woodland to Mississippian times at the Schild site and to investigate the possibility of gene flow from elsewhere in the region. Our results suggest that the Late Woodland to Mississippian cultural transition at Schild was not due to an influx of people from elsewhere. Instead, it is more likely that the transition to Mississippian cultural practices at this site was due to a process of acculturation.” ref 

The genetic prehistory of the lower Illinois River valley: An ancient DNA analysis of Yokem Mounds 1-5

“Yokem Mounds and its neighboring lower Illinois River valley sites were part of a dramatic cultural shift that occurred during the transition from the Late Woodland period (CE 400-1050) to the Mississippian period (CE 1050-1400) of Illinois prehistory. Evident changes in diet, burial treatment, and material culture accompanied this transition at Yokem Mounds. What remains unknown is whether the transition cooccurred with a population displacement by originators of the Mississippian culture, the Cahokians, or other Mississippian immigrants. My ancient DNA analysis of Yokem Mounds 1-5 tackled this question, as well as described other cultural behaviors in order to identify additional impacts of the Mississippian culture.” ref 

“Conclusion: Tuberculosis was present during the Middle Woodland period in Illinois well before CE 900, which is when the most apparent skeletal cases in North America begin to be identified. The Middle Woodland individual Yo 3-11A possessed the MTBC specific IS1081 element and a possible MTBC gyrase B sequence and this individual dates to BCE 0 to CE 80. Another Yokem individual with an older radiocarbon date,  BCE 240 to 160, possessed the same gyrase B sequence as Yo 3-11A, but the IS1081 element could not be amplified. Tuberculosis is present amongst an additional nine individuals associated with the Late Woodland and Mississippian periods at Yokem Mounds and Schild Cemetery. Two strains of ancient tuberculosis were identified amongst the Yokem Mounds Mississippian individuals. These strains predate the zoonotic transfer of an ancient tuberculosis species most closely related to M. pinnipedii, which were identified in Peru. Therefore, the trans-continental spread of the ancient Peruvian species is an unlikely source of the Yokem Mounds species, unless the former is older than has been currently identified and the species became human adapted. Many researchers caution against destructive ancient DNA research of tuberculosis to diagnosis specific cases because of the financial and labor commitment required. But, if an ancient DNA analysis of an individual or sample population is already being undertaken to answer additional cultural and population genetic questions, then I would recommend that all samples be screened for the presence of ancient MTBC DNA. As discussed previously, tuberculosis has a long history of human infection, but there are very few cases identified before A.D. 1000 in the Americas. Therefore, there should be many unidentified cases of the disease that have yet to be found. I recommend testing all individuals in a population study because ancient MTBC DNA can be amplified from individuals that possess unspecific lesions or even lack any skeletal evidence of the disease.” ref 

An Ancient DNA Perspective on Mound 72, Cahokia

“Although the principle coordinates analysis (PCoA) showed a remarkably similar relationship (see Figures 4 and 5) between the mitochondrial haplogroup frequency genetic distances and the biodistances derived from the female subset of the dental metric values, the Mantel test rm-value of -0.4051 with a p-value of 0.875 did not show results similar to previously reported correlations of genetic and dental metrics or traits (Hubbard et al. 2015; Rathmann et al. 2017; Irish et al. 2020) in terms of the strength of the affinity or direction of association. The Mantel 0.00 0.05 0.10 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 Mitochondrial FST Residuals, Dental Metric FST Residuals from Females Only, Figure 8. Mantel Correlation between Mitochondrial Haplogroup Frequency and Dental Metric Biodistance of Females R2=0.02596 146 test tests for association between two matrices under the null hypothesis that there is no association between the two sets of values, so we must conclude that any association between the biodistance and genetic measurements is not strong enough to be statistically significant. Additionally, the negative association between the values is difficult to interpret. Irish and colleagues (2020) reported the rm-value of the correlation between 36 dental non-metric trait MMD values and the Hudson Fst distances derived from >350,000 SNPs across the genome of 0.720 with a p-value of 0.000. Hubbard et al. 2015 reported a rm-value of 0.50 with a p-value of 0.21 when comparing 42 STRs to dental traits in a paired sample. Rathmann et al. 2017 reported a rm-values of .55 (p < 0.001) and 0.64 (p < 0.001) when comparing STRs and SNPs to crown measurements.” ref

“This difference results from a few factors that distinguish this study from other comparisons in the literature. First, most of the samples from the previous analyses were from living humans (with the exception of Rathmann and colleagues (2017)), so populations included were contemporaneous and without the confounding factors that using multigenerational cemeteries can introduce. Skeletal collections include individuals who would not have lived at the same time and also may only contain a subgroup of the community. Second, the mitochondrial haplogroup frequency comparisons do not carry the same genetic resolution as autosomal STR or SNP data. Finally, this analysis includes fewer populations from a much smaller region than any previous analysis. Previous haplogroup frequency and biometric analyses in the American Midwest region have shown little genetic distinction between any burial groups assessed. This may indicate that the given size and level of genetic diversity in my data set might not provide the power needed to show statistically significant results. It also may indicate that the smaller regional analysis of largely genetically indistinguishable populations are not well suited for research using dental data in the same way that geographically larger studies are. Comparisons of results using more genetic markers such as autosomal SNPs or STRs would be necessary to distinguish between these conclusions. However, from the available literature, it is apparent that studies largely focused on broad relationships between long-isolated populations can rely on dental data from these populations. Because of this, the use of destructive analysis necessary in aDNA work within large skeletal collection is unnecessary if the research questions are centered around these broad regional relationship. Even in studies using ‘minimally’ or ‘non-destructive’ extraction methods, some degree of destruction or chemical alteration occurs, making any procedure a potential loss of ability for future analyses. In cases where broad regional relationships are being tested, dental data can be used as a less destructive, expensive approach to reach the same conclusions.” ref 

The Genetic Legacy of the Mississippians

Abstract

“In this study, we examine the maternal relationships between Mississippian peoples and potential living Native American descendants in Eastern North America. First, we present new ancient DNA results from American Bottom and Illinois River valley Mississippians buried at the East St. Louis, Janey B. Goode, and Yokem sites in Illinois. Our results increase the sample size of Mississippian mitochondrial DNA to facilitate population comparisons with ancient and extant groups. Our results show that Mississippians were genetically diverse, with all five major Native American haplogroups represented (A, B, C, D, and X). We show that within-hap-logroup diversity was maintained across an 800-year time span except in the case of haplogroup D, in which ancient lineages were more diverse. Finally, we show that Native American genetic diversity appears to have been structured geographically, as Midwestern groups from all time periods are more similar to one another than those from outlying regions.” ref

I think god beliefs (great spirit/shy father god) came into the Americas from North Asia from 7,000 to 5,000 years ago. I think it likely relates to the Na-Dene languages migrations as all of the Na-Dene languages have “great spirit” beliefs and some have shy father god/creator beliefs as well.

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

People don’t commonly teach religious history, even that of their own claimed religion. No, rather they teach a limited “pro their religion” history of their religion from a religious perspective favorable to the religion of choice. 

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

Do you truly think “Religious Belief” is only a matter of some personal choice?

Do you not see how coercive one’s world of choice is limited to the obvious hereditary belief, in most religious choices available to the child of religious parents or caregivers? Religion is more commonly like a family, culture, society, etc. available belief that limits the belief choices of the child and that is when “Religious Belief” is not only a matter of some personal choice and when it becomes hereditary faith, not because of the quality of its alleged facts or proposed truths but because everyone else important to the child believes similarly so they do as well simply mimicking authority beliefs handed to them. Because children are raised in religion rather than being presented all possible choices but rather one limited dogmatic brand of “Religious Belief” where children only have a choice of following the belief as instructed, and then personally claim the faith hereditary belief seen in the confirming to the belief they have held themselves all their lives. This is obvious in statements asked and answered by children claiming a faith they barely understand but they do understand that their family believes “this or that” faith, so they feel obligated to believe it too. While I do agree that “Religious Belief” should only be a matter of some personal choice, it rarely is… End Hereditary Religion!

Opposition to Imposed Hereditary Religion

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

ref, ref, ref, ref 

Animism: Respecting the Living World by Graham Harvey 

“How have human cultures engaged with and thought about animals, plants, rocks, clouds, and other elements in their natural surroundings? Do animals and other natural objects have a spirit or soul? What is their relationship to humans? In this new study, Graham Harvey explores current and past animistic beliefs and practices of Native Americans, Maori, Aboriginal Australians, and eco-pagans. He considers the varieties of animism found in these cultures as well as their shared desire to live respectfully within larger natural communities. Drawing on his extensive casework, Harvey also considers the linguistic, performative, ecological, and activist implications of these different animisms.” ref

Damien Marie AtHope’s Art

We are like believing machines we vacuum up ideas, like Velcro sticks to almost everything. We accumulate beliefs that we allow to negatively influence our lives, often without realizing it. Our willingness must be to alter skewed beliefs that impend our balance or reason, which allows us to achieve new positive thinking and accurate outcomes.