Murdock goes on, trying to find evidence for a global ancient civilization by pointing to alleged similarities between disparate cultures.
In addition, like the biblical tale of Cain and Abel, “Tonga tradition states that ‘the son of the first man killed his brother.’”[1, p. 394]
The claim that Tonga tradition contains such a narrative is given as source Churchward's Lost Continent of Mu. He in turn provides O'Brien's Mystic Isles of the South Seas as a source, and there the trace dries up. O'Brien makes no claims as to scholarliness, in fact quite the opposite. He starts his book with:
This is a simple record of my days and nights, my thoughts and dreams, in the mystic isles of the South Seas, written without authority of science or exactitude of knowledge. These are merely the vivid impressions of my life in Tahiti and Moorea, the merriest, most fascinating world of all the cosmos; of the songs I sang, the dances I danced, the men and women, white and tawny, with whom I was joyous or melancholy; the adventures at sea or on the reef, upon the sapphire lagoon, and on the silver beaches of the most beautiful of tropics. [2]
Thus, O'Brien did not even try to figure out whether the folk tales he reported were particularly old or if they were stories that had been influenced by Christian missionaries - which the colonizing west had brought in great numbers to all imperial nooks and crannies. Can we assume all religions around the world have conservatively protected their narratives from foreign influences? The answer seems to be a resounding no, and the evidence - lots of religions around the world incorporating and adapting Christian and Muslim narratives in their beliefs since the missionary activity of the age of exploration and later seems to bear this out.
Also, in Fiji “is still shown the site where a vast tower was built because the Fijians were curious and wanted to peep into the moon to discover if it was inhabited,” a story reminiscent of the biblical tale of the Tower of Babel. As Walker says, “The Babel myth is found all over the world, including India and Mexico.”[1, p. 394]
Again, O'Brien (by proxy of Churchward) is our source; the Fijian tower narrative's origins and so on would be easy to verify if he had told us a particular island, where the tower remains are, etc.
At least one group of South Sea islanders, the Melanesians, portrayed the sun as having 12 demi-gods or heroes, like the “helpers” and “disciples” of the Horus/Jesus myth.[1, p. 394]
No. source. given. Regarding Melanesian religion, G.W. Trompf has this to say:
Melanesia has been revealed as the home of about one-third of mankind's languages, and that means - considering how languages are so crucial in defining discrete cultures - just as many religions. It is now eminently clear that accurate generalizations about Melanesian traditional religions are very difficult to make; [3, p. 10]
As most other scholars currently in that field, Trompf includes Papua New Guinea in Melanesia. That is not a universal practice, however, and if Murdock only includes the smaller islands east of Papua New Guinea, the amount of tribes this claim can pertain to is significantly smaller, but still large. This demonstrates that for accountability, Murdock should have included which particular Melanesia she is speaking about - does it exclude or include Papua New Guinea? Even better, she should have mentioned which particular group among the Melanesians she is referring to (in which case specifying what she means by Melanesia would be superfluous). As for the claim's current form, the effort it would take to verify or reject it is excessive, and thus I would consider it functionally unfalsifiable.
A careful reading of Trompf's Melanesian Religion as well as his The Religions of Oceania all come up empty with regards to the claim that the sun had 12 demi-gods or heroes.
Thus, we see the mythos and ritual around the world. We also know that this knowledge constitutes not only religion but also science, representing detailed observations of the skies and their relationship to Earth, as well as natural forces upon the planet itself. In fact, in order for any civilization to have been global, it would have needed to possess the mythos, since such is in reality the story of astronomy.[1, p. 395]
"The mythos". Why would a global civilization have to possess this particular mythos? Is it not possible to construct multiple very different myths from the same sky and use different such myths for the purpose of organizing and studying it? Nevertheless, this is a good example of begging the question. Assuming that this "mythos" was as widely shared as she purports, she then argues that it in fact is a pre-requisite for an ancient world-wide culture. I would rest the case here, really - no such world-wide culture existed, thus there is no need for a world-wide ancient mythos.
The detailed knowledge of astronomy, along with that of ocean currents, weather patterns and migratory routes of birds and fish, allowed early peoples to navigate all over the globe. In fact, the so-called primitive peoples of Polynesia are considered the “greatest navigators in the history of mankind” and successfully colonized a number of Pacific islands as early as 30,000 years ago.[1, p. 395]
Source? Which islands were those? I have previously written about these Pacific claims. It seems that Melanesian contact with Polynesians is about three to four thousand years old, at most.
Such a feat required extensive knowledge of the stars, demonstrating that these peoples were master astronomers tens of thousands of years ago. This detailed knowledge is also exhibited in the celestial “computers” in stone the navigators left all over the world. [1, p. 395]
We do have a fair share of knowledge about Polynesian navigation. Indeed, the stars do figure, but we also know they used several other methods; knowledge about the stars does not particularly help in finding previously unknown islands, and it seems the Polynesians had knowledge that helped in discovering new land. This is based on an understanding of ocean currents, of the migrations of fish, and the use of captured birds that do not land on water. I recommend checking Polynesian stick charts out for reference. (I will not deny, however, that the Polynesians used astronomical methods in their navigation.)
The evidence of a global civilization is found in shared astronomical and astrological peculiarities, such as the reverence for the Pleiades, the Great Bear and the constellation of Scorpio or “scorpion stars,” a designation found from India to Greece and in Central America. Furthermore, as Walker states: Chaldeans believed the world would dissolve and return to its primordial elements when all the planets lined up in the constellation of the Crab. The same doctrine appeared in India, Egypt, Persia, China, northern Europe, and pre-Columbian central America. [1, p. 395]
This claim has taken a somewhat tortuous route: Murdock quotes Barbara Walker (notoriously bad scholar), who in turn quotes Joseph Campbell, who in turn quotes an article by Alfred Jeremias in an Encyclopedia of Religion [4]. Not one made sure to keep any additional information along the ride. Alas, A. Jeremias does not tell us where in Mexico or South America to find those ideas, nor does he provide any sources. Further, Walker has changed the content along the line - nowhere in Joseph Campbell's nor Alfred Jeremias' texts is northern Europe mentioned at all. Neither does Jeremias make it clear whether these ideas supposedly where there in pre-Columbian times, although such an interpretation is not impossible or even unreasonable, just not explicitly spelled out.
The antiquity of astrological/astronomical knowledge is in fact great. The zodiac in the temple of Denderah in Egypt begins with the sun in Leo, which would make it 10,000 years old, although the temple itself is evidently only a couple of thousand years old.[1, p. 395]
Dupuis traced the origins of the zodiac to north Africa 15,000 years ago, and Volney pushed it back to 17,000 years ago. It is reasoned that Egypt at the time had excellent soil and a clear sky, serving as the perfect place for devising such a complex system.[1, p. 395]
Most places - except those with excessively moist climates - can be said to have had 'clear skies' for most of imaginable history and pre-history. Further, excellent soil is maybe a prerequisite (although why would not excellent fishing waters suffice?). In what ways is the zodiac a 'complex' system? Sure, the astrological constellations are great in numbers - which requires some good method of maintaining traditions, but the names and imagery used seems to be the kind that would be rather easy to remember. Also, even if those qualities of a country are prerequisites for the zodiac being developed, the fact that some place had those prerequisites does not suffice as evidence that it indeed occurred there.
However, Murdock does not here provide the references to where Volney and Dupuis achieve these wild feats of .. well, something at least. My exposure to Volney's and Dupuis writings leave me far from convinced - to believe any conclusions they drew, I would want to see the evidence, and their reasoning. Their manner of thinking was far from scientific.
In addition, Massey stated that the astronomical mythology dates back 30,000 years at least. A. Churchward thrusts it back much further than that. [1, p. 395]
And not one among these were credible researchers either! Murdock's reference to Massey is mistaken, as she says this is on page 201 of Historical Jesus Mythical Christ, where no such claim is present. The most similar bit I find is the following, which appears far earlier in the book:
In the course of Precession, about 255 B.C., the vernal birthplace passed into the sign of the Fishes, and the Messiah who had been represented for 2155 years by the Ram or Lamb, and previously for other 2155 years by the Apis Bull, was now imaged as the Fish, or the "Fish-man," called Ichthys in Greek. The original Fish-man—the An of Egypt, and the Oan of Chaldea—probably dates from the previous cycle of precession, or 26,000 years earlier; and about 255 B.C., the Messiah, as the Fish-man, was to come up once more as the Manifestor from the celestial waters. The coming Messiah is called Dag, the Fish, in the Talmud; and the Jews at one time connected his coming with some conjunction, or occurrence, in the sign of the Fishes! [5]
First we may note that the reasoning for the claim that it goes back a further 26,000 years is curiously absent. Of course, the printed version of the lecture does state that the proper quotations of authorities are to be found in Massey's The Natural Genesis, but if so, proper referencing practice would be to quote The Natural Genesis rather than Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ. An electronically aided search through TNG indicates no such argument is found there - he does speak a fair bit about the time-span of a precessional cycle, something on the order of 25,800 years, which seems just close enough to the claimed span of time.
I have my suspicions regarding another claim the above quoted segment, but that is irrelevant for the discussion regarding The Christ Conspiracy.
As to the importance of linguistical evidence in detecting the origins of man, James Churchward says, “Language is admitted to be the most accurate guide in tracing the family relations of various peoples, even when inhabiting countries which are separated by vast expanses of water and extents of land.” [1, p. 396]
We do know this only is partially true - let us consider some counterexamples: Afroamericans do not, by and large, descend from Englishmen, and a significant number of white, native speakers of English descend from speakers of other European languages - Slavic, Romance, other Germanic, Greek, Uralic and so on, throughout Northern America. Meanwhile, we have the Finns in northern Europe who are genetically fairly Germanic-like, despite speaking a decidedly non-Germanic language. Many white Americans have some African ancestry, and parts of Germany definitely have a Slavic undercurrent. Generally though, there is some truth to what Churchward said, or rather, there was some truth to it in the 19th century. Today, we have DNA sequencing. Of course, DNA sequencing tells us nothing about the cultural transmission, whereas linguistics gets closer to actually telling us something about which culture has been dominant at the time a tribe has established itself. (Although nothing fully decisive.)
The linguistical/etymological evidence that connects the world is startling and has been demonstrated throughout this book. Mainly, however, our analysis has been confined to the “Old World.” We have already seen some dazzling examples of how the languages of both worlds are related. As a basic example, the word “Mama” and/or “Ma” meaning mother is found in numerous cultures around the globe. A more complex etymological similarity can been found in the Mexican name Mexitli or Mesitli, meaning “the Anointed One,” obviously related to the Egyptian Messu and the Hebrew Messiah. In Maya, “balaam” is a priest, while in Hebrew it is the name of a prophet.[1, p. 396]
No, in Maya, Balaam is a common surname signifying 'jaguar', whereas Chilam means priest. Keep up, Murdock. In the Hebrew Bible, Bileam is a peculiar prophet - not a Hebrew prophet, but a prophet among another people, who tries to prophesy against Israel but fails. His name means 'not of the people', which tells a bit about the conceptual role he plays in the narrative. Chilam Balaam was a legendary (probably non-existent) author who compiled the Books of Chilam Balaam.
Sitchin is the source for the Mexitli-claim, and he is not giving any sources either. Sitchin is also known for idiosyncratic (read: baseless) translations.
Mexitli apparently most likely means 'agave hare'. [For claims about words in Mexican languages, two dictionaries are linked after the other sources at the end of this essay.]
There are in fact numerous correlations between the ancient Mexican language and that of the Middle East, including the Sumerian. Indeed, the Mexican culture has close parallels in art, religion and language to Sumer as well.[1, p. 396]
Some. goddamn. sources. please. With claims as unspecific as these, Murdock is essentially only making airy-fairy claims that sound fascinating, but lack actual discernible content - showing her wrong is impossible even if she were wrong. Which I find it likely that she is.
Moreover, the Mayan creator god was called “Hurakan,” and the Caribbean storm god was “Hurukan,” both of which are nearly identical to the Tibetan wrathful deity, “Heruka,” which in turn is related to Herakles or Hercules. [1, p. 396]
The Tibetan Heruka are a category of Gods, including eight different gods, neither whom has a name very similar to the term itself. Since there are eight gods on that side to compare, the likelihood that at least one among them parallels any given feature of Hurakan/Hurukan (the two of which do probably share an origin in Carib mythology) is fairly high. A more detailed comparison would be required to establish any relatedness.
Many more examples of correspondences exist between “Old” and “New” World words. Charles Berlitz cites, for example, the similarity between “teocalli,” which means “house of the gods” in Aztec/Nahuatl, and “theou kalia,” meaning “God’s house” in Greek. The word for “river” in Greek is “potamos,” which is very close to the Potomac River in North America.[1, p. 396]
The Potomac river got its name from the Patawomeck tribe in a slightly anglicized form. The Patawomack name is clearly less similar to potamos. Further, random correspondences are random correspondences. A systematic correspondence would be significantly more valuable. Most suggested etymologies of Patawomeck seems to be based on the locality being a place whereto tribute was brought or trade was frequent, rather than anything to do with it being a river.
Further, do the maths.
In the South American language of Aymara, “malku” means “king,” as does “melek” and “melchi” in Semitic languages. In both the American tongue of Araucanian and the Egyptian language the word “anta” means “sun,” while a number of terms in Quechua are similar in form and meaning to Sumerian terms. The list goes on and includes cultures from the South Seas to North Europe as well. [1, p. 397]
As I have pointed out, random similarities between languages are to be expected. When you have two continents, both with several linguistic families, you are likely to run into a huge number of random similarities. A scattershot approach as the one given above - Inca:malku, Semitic:melek, Egyptian:anta,Araucanian:anta, ... you will unavoidably find correlates. (Finally, the Egyptian word is 'int' in modern notation, and signifies one of the boats of the sun god, and the Auracanian word antü also signifies 'day', 'season', 'weather', and 'time' in addition to the sun, so some etymological differences are definitely there. Of course, this would all have been easier to find out if Murdock had used some standard transliteration of Egyptian or actually checked an Auracanian dictionary before writing claims about the language. Precision helps verify claims. Please, please learn that one fact, Murdock.) A large systematic comparison would be called for. If Murdock were to find any remarkable comparisons, she would obviously face some opposition among historical linguists, but if her evidence were convincing enough, she would have made quite the name for herself. It is easier to whine about being passed over in academia, though, so I doubt she will actually do anything like this.
Archaeological Evidence
The global civilization and its mythos are reflected in the amazing physical remains around the world, which have never been fully explained or addressed by mainstream authorities. Nevertheless, from Giza and Baalbek to Stonehenge, Tiahuanaco, China and Pohnpei are ruins of unexplained origins and resemblance, prompting John Keel, for one, to exclaim, “There had to be a single worldwide culture at one point in ancient history. . . . Some thing or someone inspired the ancients to perform incredible feats of construction.” [1, p. 397]
John Keel believes is an 'ancient ufologist', and thus his credibility is perhaps not the best. Of course, Keel's exlamation does not commit to anything: someone or some thing? I guess the latter half of this paragraph is but a rhetorical point.
There is also a remarkable resemblance between Central/ South American structures and those found in India, as has been noted by Indian architect Sri V. Ganapati Sthapati, who demonstrated that residential layouts at Machu Picchu were identical to those of the Harappan civilization at the ruined city of Mohenjodaro in the Indus Valley.[1, p. 397]
This claim is presented in Hinduism Today. Looking closer at the claims Sthapati presents seem to suggest he is willingly distorting the measurements he took (as in rounding them off significantly to obtain the results he wants), and making claims that seem to exaggerate the precision present in certain of the comparisons. From a small sample of buildings he concludes that Incas followed the 'traditional Hindu' rule not to build residential houses more than twice as long as their width - from pictures of Ollantaytambo I think I've found evidence of residential buildings violating this claim.
In addition, some researchers are now declaring the mysterious Mohenjodaro to be much older than the orthodox opinion, possibly as much as 8,000 years old. Interestingly, Mohenjodaro has been determined to have been a cosmopolitan area, with skeletons found of the following types: “Mediterraneans, Caucasoids, Armenoids, Alpines, Australoids and Mongoloids.” [1, p. 397]
A source is given for the latter half of this statement - an article in Hinduism Today interviewing professor B.B. Lal. This particular article is in fact relatively nice by comparison to most stuff in Hinduism Today - the same edition contains HIV-AIDS denialism and the claim that herbal remedies and other alternative medicine approaches can heal AIDS, so the interview with professor Lal was a breath of fresh air in a putrid nest of superstition and credulity. However, not a single shred of support is offered by Murdock for the 8,000 year claim.
The age of Machu Picchu is likely thousands of years older than the orthodox date, as was asserted by its inheritors, the Inkas. The architect Sthapati has also determined that the Mayan temple at Chichen Itza was “built according to the same design principles found in India’s Hindu temples.” J. Churchward posits that the fabulous structures at Chichen Itza, attributed by the orthodoxy to “the Maya” of a mere 1500 years ago, are in fact at least 11,500 years old. These structures and others worldwide were taken over by subsequent cultures, demonstrated by the fact that some of them show not only ancient repair work but also “improvements” in the form of encasements over the original ruins. [1, p. 397]
Cultures do repair their own structures and improve them all of the time. There is no mystery here, and Murdock is clearly trying to pull a fast one. J. Churchward is definitely one of the kookier of her sources, and he is known to have fabricated evidence. Also, again, a considerable lack of sources for quite a remarkable claim indeed: Chichen Itza being 11,500 years is quite unlikely no matter how credulous you are.
[1] D.M. Murdock, The Christ Conspiracy, 1999. Adventures unlimited.
[2] O'Brien, Mystic Isles of the South Sea , available at https://ia600508.us.archive.org/14/items/mysticislesofthe11400gut/11400-h/11400-h.html
[3] Trompf, G.W., Melanesian Religion, Cambridge University Press, 1991
[4] Alfred Jeremias, The Ages of the World (Babylonian), https://archive.org/details/encyclopaediaofr03hastuoft
[5] Massey, Historical Jesus Mythical Christ, http://gerald-massey.org.uk/massey/dpr_01_historical_jesus.htm
[6] Two easily available, but unfortunately short dictionaries of Mayan and Yucatec Mayan
