Sunday, 1 April 2012

Cro-Magnon/Atlanteans colonised America

By Robert John Langdon

This month we resolve one of the greatest mysteries in anthropology, how the A, B and AB blood groups originated in North America.  As Wikipedia would tell you:
                                                               
According to the New World migration model, a migration of humans from Eurasia to the Americas took place via Beringia, a land bridge that connected the two continents across what is now the Bering Strait. The most recent point at which this migration could have taken place, where the first Americans set foot on Alaska, is 40,000 - 12,000 years ago; a hotly disputed topic. 



Traditional Distribution of 'Walking' humans in time


The early Paleo-Indians spread throughout the Americas, diversifying into many hundreds of culturally distinct nations and tribes. According to the oral histories of many of the indigenous peoples of the Americas, they have been living there since their genesis, described by a wide range of traditional creation accounts.


While some indigenous peoples of the Americas were historically hunter-gatherers, many practiced aquaculture and agriculture. The impact of their agricultural endowment to the world is a testament to their time and work in reshaping and cultivating the flora indigenous to the Americas.  Some societies depended heavily on agriculture while others practiced a mix of farming, hunting, and gathering. In some regions the indigenous peoples created monumental architecture, large-scale organized cities, chiefdoms, states, and empires.


Blood Type 'O' map - Notices the Blue Areas of 'O' only


Many parts of the Americas are still populated by indigenous Americans; some countries have sizable populations, especially Bolivia, Peru, Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia, and Ecuador. At least a thousand different indigenous languages are spoken in the Americas.  Some, such as Quechua languages, Aymara, Guaraní, Mayan languages, and Nahuatl, count their speakers in millions. Many also maintain aspects of indigenous cultural practices to varying degrees, including religion, social organization and subsistence practices. Some indigenous peoples still live in relative isolation from Western society, and a few are still uncontacted peoples.


So, according to wiki,  about 40,000 years ago Homo Sapiens walked across the land bridge of Alaska and entered America (my book shows that it was more like 50,000 years ago, at the same time man found Australia), finally going south to the reached South America all sharing the same blood type 'O', but then a second wave came across in 12,000 BP and brought the Blood type A, B and AB with them and settle only in North America.  But there is a huge problem with this theory ( a part from who in their right mind would walk across a foot bridge over a thousand years, to a place were its cold and inhospitable?) for the next map shows the Rh negative distribution of Blood from the Asian continent.



On the East Coast of Asia there is no Rh Neg blood, 90% of the Blood is 'O' type Rh positive - less than 10% A,B or AB Rh positive. So if there were travellers that took the 'land bridge across' they disappeared into extinction  of never left a trace of interbreeding with the local peoples.  This clearly is impossible.

According to Blood centre.stanford.edu. 2008-06-20 - 15% of the US population has Rh negative blood.

So where did these people come from?


Look at the map again and see the frequency of the AB blood line - British Isles, Iceland, Greenland and the the East Coast of America and Canada moving West-  not the other way.  In 'Dawn of the Lost Civilisation out in June, the maps show that Europe and The Northern Atlantic looked a lot different than today as the Sea Levels were 160m Lower than present increasing the size of the Land Masses allowing easy passage across the Atlantic to America.

An earlier Blog has shown that Reed boats - which have been used by Cro-Magnon man since they were 'born' or  more mutated in about 40,000 BP on the shorelines of the Caspian Sea.  These boats are capable of sea travel (http://robertjohnlangdon.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/advanced-civilisation-or-just-lost.html) using a device called a Sunstone.  A Sunstone is a device that allows navigators to follow the sun (so knowing East from West) when it is daytime but cloudy.  My book looks at it and how it was used in-depth, but the most important aspect of this device which we know was used by the Vikings, it is ONLY found in the North East of Atlantis/Doggerland on the coast of Norway in the old world.

Cro-Magnon's have Rh Negative blood and recent findings in America confirms our findings.

A skeleton estimated as being 10,000 years old was found in the ‘tomb of Palli Aike’ in Tierra del Fuego in 1969-70 and has been identified as Cro-Magnon, which indicates that this race also spread to South America. Scientists consider Neanderthal man as the proto-European, and Cro-Magnon a later arrival, probably from the east. He also sees the Cro-Magnons as bearing many similarities to the North American Indians, being tall, muscular, athletic and agile.

Dr. James C. Chatters, a University of Washington specialist in human osteology, while investigating what was originally thought to be a modern homicide, found himself analyzing the bones of a 9,000 year old skeleton. Upon examination, the 5 feet 9 inches tall specimen had "characteristics that are similar to those of Europeans." (Chatters, 2000) According to Chatters, the skull is dolichocranic (long-headed) rather than brachycranic (round-headed), and exhibits "fairly prominent brow ridges." Now known as Kennewick Man, this skeleton possesses many of the characteristics of our typical Atlantean Cro-Magnons.

Kennewick Man - 9,000 year old Cro-Magnon

And not only bodies but barrow culture too.

Looks like a round barrow to me - Grave Creek Mound, West Virginia

Poverty Point culture 8000 - 7000 BP is not well understood in terms of social organization, it was involved in the transportation of nonlocal raw materials (for example, shell, stone, and copper) from throughout the eastern United States into the lower Mississippi River Valley to selected sites where the materials were worked into finished products and then traded. While specific information on Poverty Point subsistence, trade mechanisms, and other cultural aspects is still speculative, the sites nevertheless exhibit specific material culture, such as baked clay objects, magnetite plummets, steatite bowls, red-jasper lapidary work, fiber-tempered pottery, and microlithic stone tools - which is a clear indication of Cro-Magnon influence.

Dr. Dennis Stanford of the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History in Washington, also states: "We now know that human beings learned to sail 50,000 years before the present. Mankind settled in Australia then and it was not linked by any land bridge to Asia. It could only have been reached by boat. Clearly, we had mastered sailing tens of thousands of years before America was colonized, so we should not be surprised by the idea that people took boat trips across the Atlantic 18,000 years ago" (Stanford & Bradley, 2004)

RJL



65 comments:

  1. Robert

    Interesting post - again!

    Was Kostas right then and they had jacket potatoes?

    Dr Stuart Love

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stuart

      No sorry he was wrong for once ;-).

      The book goes into the Diet of Cro-Magnon man and contrary to popular belief, he did not eats ants and rabbits - reindeer, fish and fruit was his main diet.

      Root vegetables and farmed animals have toxins that would stunt his mental and physical growth - like us!

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Robert

      What toxins do you mean?

      Or are you referring to chemicals sprayed on the crops and within processed food supplies for farming animals?

      Stuart

      Delete
    3. Stuart

      I have not taken into account any chemicals that pollute the water supply and food chain, although that has had a significant effect on our bodies which we are all suffer, but this is a recent event.

      The Neolithic Revolution was mainly organic and should have not effected us greatly, but it did. What we are finding now is that plants - yes plants give off a gas when attacked to warn other plants, when a plant detects this gas it releases a toxin to stop it being killed. Sadly, in a feild these plants are next to each other, so the first plants are toxin free but 99% of the rest have this released toxin - which would not happen in the wild.

      The same thing happens to animals, when they are 'stressed' they release a toxin - an abattoir is an unbelievable stressing environment for the animals to be slaughtered and the same process occurs.

      Cro-magnon man did not suffer theses problems - the animal killed by bow and arrow did not know they were going to die and the food grew wild and far a part for the plants to message each other - weird but true!

      RJL

      Delete
    4. RJL,

      I have been doing my own research into the possibility that Atlantis was a real continent located on what is now the Mid Atlantic Ridge near the Azores. There are many recent exciting geological discoveries lately to highlight the theory. One, core samples, provided by Woods Hole prove the Ridge was above sea level 12,000 years ago and much older. It was only sunk recently. Two, ancient riverbeds discovered in the Azores show that these rivers came from peaks 10,000 feet above sea level and these gorges extend into the sea where more smoothed river boulders are gathered. Three, there are at least 6 concentric rings of coral around much of the Ridge showing successive submergences for the last 80,000 years until 12,000 years ago when most of the Ridge went under except the Azores which would represent the highest mountains in ancient Atlantis, which I believe the Ridge to have been. There is no doubt that there was a huge landmass located in the middle of the Atlantic complete with coral beaches, plants, glaciated mountains, rivers etc. Now the question is how can we prove that people lived there and that it was the CroMagnons? This makes sense for the Cromagnon invasions into Europe because they did not invade from the East they came from the West. In my humble opinion, the scientific jigsaw puzzle pieces fit better when we accept Plato's legend and that Atlantis, the home of the builders of pre Deluvian Egypt, really did sink beneath the waves 12,000 years ago. It also makes sense because of the Guanche mummies of the Canary Islands. These peoples were related and thier mummies are ancient plus the legend they told the Spanish before they were murdered is that they came from an even bigger Island further West but it sank. How did the Ridge sink? In my limited geological knowledge I have found that the old North pole was centered around the Hudson Bay in Canada, when it reformed in its present location vast amounts of land in Siberia were frozen instantly and destroyed all of the temperate forests where mammoths grazed for food during the season. There are literally thousands of animals frozen in time around the new polar circle. Whatever happened, happened fast, there were earthquakes, giant tsunamis pushed inland as evidenced in Alaska where bones of ancient creatures are broken and smashed along with trees mixed in with boulders, frozen ice and muck. Many ancient cities have been discovered off major countries in 200 ft of water or more. That indicates to me that the continental shelves along all land bordering the oceans were once the old beach line when the oceans were lower. I also imagine since the last North Pole was over land this could account for why the ocean levels were so low then. When it reformed over water those levels never went down. A simple search on google earth of the Ridge will reveal a land with many fractures and seasmic activity so its also possible that due to the weight of the ocean basin filled with more water, that this land could have sank in various places. Just like when an icecap forms over land it depresses the land but the land rebounds when the ice is removed. Does land have to be covered in ice to achieve the same effect over the Ridge? Wouldn't the weight of the water surrounding the Ridge depress the thin crust surrounding the Ridge?

      Delete
    5. Anon

      I accept all of your hypothesis, except location for Atlantis.

      Plato's writings show a huge continent - not a small island in fact the word 'island' in Greek can be confused with peninsula.

      The Azores - like the Canaries no doubt were out posts and trading islands with Atlantis (the sea was 65m lower than today) making the Azores much bigger and possibly joined together.

      Keep up with the research, you raise some interesting points.

      RJL

      Delete
    6. Yeah but didn't Plato also say:

      "there lay an island which was larger than Libya and Asia together"

      Which is surely complete nonsense and anyway 100% rule out Doggerland. But we can't pick n choose, nor take any of this stuff totally literally, can we?

      Delete
    7. Plato was a scribe and didn't write 'nonsense' as we still study his writings today at Universities throughout the world.

      The Greek word for island can also mean peninsula (surround on three side) therefore as we know the dates of Doggerland sinking matches Plato's dates and the DNA of the Doggerland culture we know know built the megalithic monuments through the world - clearly the land Plato was referring to was Doggerland or Atlantis - which is slightly bigger than Libya and Asia (Asia minor was the only land mass known to Greeks)!!

      Delete
    8. Interesting. So is Plato's "peninsula" then referring to the British Isles part (going by this Doggerland map, which at 16k BC was not a peninsula, but later became one: http://cdn.zmescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/31836.jpg).

      Delete
    9. This is a better map of Doggerland/Atlantis at the time Plato suggested 9500bce

      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-83um30a1mTo/UcC3RzhEo5I/AAAAAAAAA6I/f6SutxaaFyc/s640/S9WIK.jpg

      http://www.the-stonehenge-enigma.info/2013/06/stonehenge-atlantis-momentous-discovery.html

      Delete
  2. Don't know much about blood groups yet so cannot comment seriously on your post.

    The discussion with Stuart triggers me to think of nano particles - I spent the last two years in this business. A nano particle is between 1 and 100 nanometer in size; 100 nanometer being 1/10 of a micron - so very small, roughly the size of a big virus. Current research links nano particles with several health problems, like alzheimers and heart problems. So they are small enough to penetrate cell boundaries and change the brain. There are several positive application benefits too, like waterproof wool and self-cleaning glass and more effective sun screen. Perhaps there are positive impulses for the brain that we we do not recognize currently.

    In nature nanoparticles occur largely as a result of combustion or volcanic eruptions. Wood burning is, for example, in the process of being banned in California due to its suspected consequences for health. People who burn incense believe in a positive effect although there is no empirical evidence.

    So what is my point? This is barefoot science. 70k years ago was a huge volcanic eruption - an extinction event. Exceot there was not extinction - instead humankind started on an accelerated evolution. Many people think that Clovis/Younger Dryas events also caused a big change in air quality - nano particles.

    Not sure how this all fits with your theory, but it does fit with the positive/negative toxin idea. Peace...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Chris

    Interesting idea thank you.

    One of the problems I have been wrestling with in the book is the Neanderthal extinction - I don't believe the traditional view that it was the loss of resources as modern man (Cro-Magnon's) out hunted their cousins, as they were directly related or that climate change killed them off - as they survived 200,000 years prior to the end in 30,000 BP and a variety of climatic conditions.

    So the nano particles are a new variant I have not yet considered - but incredibly interesting one - I shall take a bit of time out to do some research and get back to you, on that question.


    RJL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it possible that the neanderthals were highly successful, like modern man, and became dependent on vast food chains, and then there was a collapse of the food economy, like what is going to happen soon to us once the stock markets crash?

      That could trigger an extinction event, since if the population is so high then when their food pyramid overturned they are screwed.

      Bill Gaede explains why neanderthals went extinct due to INTRINSIC structural food chain factors and NOT extrinsic factors (comets, weather, war, disease, etc) here:
      http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xkk25d_15-how-neanderthal-disappeared_tech

      Delete
    2. Neanderthals had very primitive tools and the inability to fish. There food chains consequently would be sporadic rather than 'farmed'. Their is very limited archaeological evidence of anything to suggest anything but basic existence. The most probable reason for their disappearance is probably linked to disease - as we know they cross-breed with homo sapiens - looking what happened the the Polynesian cultures in the 16th & 17th century when western sailors also breed with the locals - sexual diseases destroyed the indigenous population.

      Delete
  4. On nano particles there is some general info on my old site - www.aerasense.com. Sometimes I tweet things that I think are relevant so feel free to link-up on twitter. My main interest in nano particles as related to current day health concerns.

    I think nobody serious with pre-history looks at this - all nano industry attention is focussed on new economic opportunities with new materials or health threats linked to e.g. diesel combustion. Plenty of forward looking issues on both upside and downside.

    I sympathize with your struggle with neanderthals. Hardly a week goes by without a new proposition. My own view is that inter-breeding resulted in the absorption of neanderthal into modern European/US man, so neanderthal never became extinct even though they vanished as a separate species,

    ReplyDelete
  5. Chris

    Thanks for the link.

    My favourites are either disease or the most probable genetic fertility (may be due to the nano's from the Campanian volcanic arc activity 40,000 BP) causing an imbalance in the percentage of male/females born to Neanderthals.

    Thus creating a need for Homo Sapiens within the extended Neanderthal 'family groups', which were supplemented by adopting the abandoned homo sapiens children (mainly girls) and the old, which hunter gather societies tend to do when travelling from summer to winter camps over tough terrain and rivers.

    This would cause mutation due to cross-breeding without prejudice within the family group and as you quite rightly indicated the virtual assimilation over just a couple of generations.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  6. Interesting you bring up the Campanian eruption (Naples area). in approx 35k BC. My focus is on the Toba eruption in approx 70k BC which resulted in a global volcanic winter of several years and, many think, near extinction of human kind. It emitted 1000 cubic kilometers of ash and buried most of S.Asia.

    I will take a closer look at the Campanian eruption

    ReplyDelete
  7. Robert,
    Instinctively I believe is is plausible US was colonized west to east. Your blood type hypothesis may even support this but the more I look into it the more I am confronted by a dazzling array of mathematical possibilities.

    Can you help me out with some reliable scientific sources?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      There isn't any!!

      That's what I like about prehistory - still an open book.

      RJL

      Delete
  8. Robert,

    Very interesting and revealing post! I am learning more and more of what you think you know! Can you please clarify for us when these blood type statistics were taken? Do these date back to 40,000 BP when your cro-magnon boat people went globe trotting?

    But if these bloody charts are of the current populations of these areas (like in the USA), what exactly can we learn from them that relates to the populations living in these areas even just 1000 years ago?

    You write,

    “According to Blood centre.stanford.edu. 2008-06-20 - 15% of the US population has Rh negative blood.

    So where did these people come from?”


    Let me hasten a wild guess! Maybe they flew over the Atlantic? Like I did and so many other Europeans carrying Rh negative blood?

    As to your 'round barrow' in West Virginia... looks to me like 'Nature-made'. Proving once again I am right and you are wrong!

    Sorry Robert. I just couldn't resist exposing the sophistry in your arguments! Nothing to worry, however! Your intellectual equals (like Chris and Love and No.sex) will declare once again their admiration for your brilliance!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      You make two very good points.

      The statistics are from current blood samples, so migration is a problem. What we do know for sure is that type 'O' blood first took over all of America from, probably the bridge between Alaska and Russia, moving over the centuries down to South America. I personally think this is the movement of Homo Erectus, who left Africa 1.7m years ago, but others better qualified believe it to be Homo Sapiens about 50,000 years ago - the same people that spread to Australia.

      The fact A,B and AB exist in America is older than immigration and the Native North American Indians (as stated in the Blog) are thought to be of Cro-Magnon heritage as they have 'A' blood in their culture, which has been discovered early in the 20th Century before mass immigration.

      The interesting aspect FOR ME is the lack of Rh- blood in Eastern Russia - where this blood type is supposed to come from over the footbridge a second time - as if the current anthropologists are correct they left no ancestry behind - a mathematical impossibility!!

      So the only conclusion is that the blood came from Europe - the fact that Cro-Magnons have been found, proves the point, until someone come up with a explanation on how an ice age European got into America without leaving a blood trace - this is the only logical possibility.

      Which makes Dr Dennis Stanford correct - not me!!

      RJL

      Delete
  9. 80% of Native Americans are type O currently and 99% are rhesus positive.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Chris

    Thank you for that update - the information I was quoting was from Bronowski's 'Ascent of Man'.

    Whether that is now out of date is a mystery?

    I will need to take another look at why anthropologists believed the 'A' blood group entered America 12,000 BP without affecting the indigenous population - who else was there?

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      35% of Native Americans are 'A' of that group 10% is Rh negative.

      Blood Groups and Red Cell Antigens [Internet].
      Dean L. Bethesda (MD): National Center for Biotechnology Information (US); 2005.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2264/

      Which is what you would expect if a group/tribe of Cro-Magnons settled in North America 10,000 years ago and mixed with the higher numbering 'O' type indigenous population.

      As we have only 4% Neanderthal DNA left in our bodies after 35,000 of cross-breeding.

      So Bronowski was correct - thank goodness - as the 10% A- variant had to come from somewhere.

      RJL

      Delete
  11. Thanks. I got my data from webmd - seems they are wrong although your data is based on donors so maybe there is a skew. Interesting about the blackfoot Indians, very high proportion of A.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Robert you write,

    “The fact A,B and AB exist in America is older than immigration and the Native North American Indians (as stated in the Blog) are thought to be of Cro-Magnon heritage as they have 'A' blood in their culture, which has been discovered early in the 20th Century before mass immigration.”


    Really? Robert, you are too full of prehistory bull when you should try some new diet! John Smith and Pocahontas! Need I say more? There were much Indian-Caucation mixing that date back to the 16th century and right through the Civil War and beyond. In fact, I would argue proportionally there were more Caucasian-Indian mixing then than after 'mass immigration' to America by Europeans in 1900 and later. Many early explorers took on Indian wives as there were no other women around. And lets not forget the Indian population dwindled filtering out 'true bloods' while the white population thrived. And those Indians that were better able to survive in a new changing social order were those with mixed blood. Many American Indians today have mixed blood, including African.

    With all your new 'evidence' from every which field, you are no further in answering the simple question. If Stonehenge was built by an advanced prehistoric civilization, where is the evidence for such civilization? Blood types? I don't think so!

    You just can't make up this stuff, Robert, to fit your theory! The further you take this from Stonehenge, the further away you go from the truth. The truth is out there, Robert! It can be found by finding explanations for all the facts on the ground! In a simple, sensible and consistent theory which mine is!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      Sadly you are back to your old 'I think therefore I'm right' mode. It is common knowledge amongst anthropologists and geneticists that the 'A' blood variant was introduced into Northern America in about 12,000 BP.

      If you have a problem with that fact, take that up with them not me!! If you take time out to Google the information, you will the references to these theories - start with Dr Jacob Bronowsi - one of the greatest scientists of the 20th century - if you wish to question his finding - please go ahead, you'll lose!

      The blog accepts the findings but questions whether that Blood type 'A' and Rh negative came from the EAST rather than the WEST and I have produced two published investigations to support my hypothesis - so what is your problem?

      If you find evidence (not your own opinion, which is to be frank worthless) that contradicts these finding do feel free to come back and inform us of your research. But your unqualified pontifications are not welcome here as they do not educate or move the debate forward in any fashion.

      RJL

      Delete
  13. Robert,

    So now you are relying on 'expert opinion' to make your case. No problem! But the 'blood evidence' in this case is 'contaminated' and inadmissible in any courtroom. My comments take your arguments and analyze the logic to them. Not introduce 'new facts'. Which I am the first to admit I don't have.

    You should welcome the opportunities I am providing you to better refine your arguments. If you do, you will encounter less opposition. What all theorists seek. And you are getting it from me free of charge! But if you again resort to blocking my posts because they shot down your 'magic flying carpet', you will miss out on this valuable service I am providing you!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      Yes I do rely on expert opinion that's why my hypothesises are credible.

      As for your FREE argument training - I'll pass on that one as it reminds me of a Monty python sketch, that has a man entering a room asking whether this is the 'right room for an argument'? - this web site isn't - I'm here to assist purchasers of my books with related questions, not irrelevant argument.

      As most questions are from people that have not bought the book, clearly the explanations contained within the text are self explanatory.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Robert you write,
      “I'm here to assist purchasers of my books with related questions, not irrelevant argument.”

      Thanks for clarifying the real purpose for your blog! That being the case, I have no interest in it!

      Kostas

      Delete
  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      I like the idea of the 'live' debate - but getting numbers at the same time maybe a problem. In early June, to support the publication of the new book, I will be sending out via an agency, an international press release, stating that we have found a major archaeological discovery, as it is a 6000 year old map of the island of Atlantis and its exact location.

      This will create a high degree of interest which we could use to get interest in a 'live debate' as the full details of the discovery will only be placed on this blog site with Photo's, diagrams and video's etc.

      This could be used to announce a 'live debate' on the Map, Atlantis, Cro-Magnons and Stonehenge as they are all linked. Maybe it would be appropriate to do the debate on the Summer solstice on the evening of the 21st June?

      As for Kostas - I'm not Brian, who bans comments that endanger the viability of his hypothesis, but I think Kostas is now aware that discussion which is based on irrelevant opinion only will no longer be tolerated.

      RJL

      Delete
  15. Chris

    You maybe interested in a current debate with Edwin at:

    http://robertjohnlangdon.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/further-evidence-of-ancient-boat-people.html?showComment=1333694600680#c6305809419745740834

    about the boats used.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks for the quick response and the links. We need to engage with more Edwins.

    A PR approach is very effective with the right agency. It is also expensive. To prepare I recommend contacting a few of your readers who can speak authoritatively to engage with the blog when the PR goes out. You only need one or two. When people land here they need to know it is a serious place - and with your news I am sure many people will come looking. Be prepared! Quality not quantity.

    Good look with the endeavor.

    On the boats I think there is plenty of circumstantial evidence from mainstream archaeology that transport by boat of people with cattle was happening in UK from 4000 BC. Maybe earlier, This could not have been happening in hollowed-out logs, Nor was west coast colonization. Many people can "buy" into this without stretching their imagination.

    Of course, when you move the date of colonization back a few thousand years into the mesolithic then you are skating on much thinner ice, but then skating on thin ice is your speciality. Personally I think serious seafaring was happening much earlier - even before the last ice age - although there is no hard data that I know of.

    While I am posting, I think the recent discovery of solutrean tools in NA supports your hypothesis perhaps to a greater extend than the blood groups.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris

      Yes, the use of the tool kits do tells us a lot more than the archaeology of this period - the blood group and associated Haplogroups also tell a story.

      The blog was written not to prove the hypothesis contained in the book - otherwise the books contents would be disappointing - but to show that too many questions have yet to be answered, by the experts and the book attempts to give a comprehensive answer to these 'isolated' unanswered questions, which includes who made Stonehenge and when.

      I think that future 'historians' need the multiple discipline's of genetics, archaeology, anthropology and even geological landscapes (not geomorphology!!) - if we are to make sense of the past, as a single discipline seems to leads to narrow interpretations and so called experts claiming no knowledge if questioned as they are 'only' a specialist in a very narrow field.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. Yes, lots of disciplines need to come together, more than you mention. Strange how "historians" play such a modest part so far.

      I look forward to your book.

      Delete
  17. Robert,

    You would be a fool to post this post. And a fraud not to! Take your pick. Either way you lose!

    The only reason why you and others ban me from freely participating is because I believe Stonehenge and all other prehistoric earthworks are the works of Earth and not people. No honest debate is possible without seriously considering this view.

    The need to silence me is confirmation I am right!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      The only reason people delete your comments is because you do not say anything relevant, but persist in calling other people frauds. If you wish to debate the 'natural' world - that's fine, just find some intelligent evidence.

      As they say 'talk is cheap', unqualified pontifications, even cheaper!

      RJL

      Delete
    2. I advised you to think carefully, Kostas, about your next post. Thanks for your honesty - "all prehistoric earthworks are the works of Earth and not people".

      Now I am sure you are a crank. The benefit of the doubt just expired.

      Delete
    3. Chris you write,

      “I advised you to think carefully, Kostas, about your next post”


      Advised me? Chris, you can blame Robert for blocking earlier replies to you! Maybe he will post the last one he blocked now that you slandered me as a 'crank'.

      Let me just say you are full of yourself to think you can advise other people what to do, how to behave, what to think and what to say! Your opinion of me does not matter, never mattered and never will matter. But your knee-jerk reaction resorting to personal attacks only confirms your inability to engage me in an honest debate. It's what common people do when they can't reason!

      Kostas

      Delete
  18. Robert,
    ... from wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Models_of_migration_to_the_New_World)

    Genetic studies of Native American populations have also shown the Solutrean theory[cro-magnon migration to America] to be unlikely, showing instead that the five main mtDNA haplogroups found in the Americas were all part of one gene pool migration from Asia.


    Be that as it may. What does all this have to do with Stonehenge and prehistoric UK? If you want to show the existence of an advanced prehistoric civilization responsible for Stonehenge and all other earthworks, you need to find evidence for the existence of such civilization in prehistoric UK. None exists! But if you think such evidence is there, please enlighten us. List your top three reasons why you think Stonehenge, for example, was made by prehistoric people.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  19. Kostas

    The haplogroups are interesting, but the migration they show from Asia to America is not reflected in the blood type Rh negative group, which they have clearly not researched.

    The fact that those haplogroups are in the States can only be explained by migration - you have two directions - East or West - geneticists rely on archaeological date and expertise to formulate they hypothesis - if the archaeologists get it wrong by placing boat travel at 1600 AD rather than 12,000 BC then they will get it wrong!

    Hence my comment to Chris stating that single discipline academics rely on too heavily on other experts rather than their own research.

    As for Stonehenge, clearly (if you have a knowledge of engineering, anthropology and psychology) clearly could never be made by a 'primitive' society as we have seen that similar structures or greater sophistication were not made until the Roman invasion some 4000 years later.

    If your (and traditional archaeologist) simplistic views of evolution was correct then bigger better buildings up to the present date. It has been shown during the period known as the 'dark ages' that history and evolution can move backwards (for 1000 years or more), what we are seeing at Stonehenge is this same process, a once advanced civilisation that could navigate the world disappearing leaving a society who relied on farming.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  20. Robert,

    DNA evidence is much more accurate and more advanced! That's why now in all courtrooms DNA evidence is admissible while 'blood type' evidence is not. The gene pool for all five halpogroups found in the Americas trace genetically to Asia. This is not an archeologists determination as you like to discredit.

    Furthermore, and more directly to the Solutrean archeological evidence you now rely on in making your case for cro-magnon colonization of the Americas 12,000 BC. Here is another quote from the same wikipedia article in my last post:

    The theory[Solutrean origins] is largely discounted by most professionals for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the differences between the two tool-making traditions far outweigh the similarities, the several thousand miles of the Atlantic Ocean to be crossed, and the 5000-year-span that separate the two different cultures.


    Further analysis of your arguments in your reply leads to the following counterpoints ...

    Blood type is passed from father to child. In a situation where we have European men (since 1500s AD) fathering children with American Indian women, the relative rate of diffusion through the population of their blood type will of course be greater. I believe this is what we have here with A and Rh– blood type.

    I do not know enough about 'blood biology', but it seems to me blood types are antigens on the red blood cell membrain resulting as an immune response to certain desease early in human history. If so, this may occur at various times and in diverse places. But I don't know for sure. What I do know is DNA markers do not easily occur and do not easily change. They are far superior in settling issues of genetics.

    In a 'dark age' period in any civilization, the evidence of their 'golden age' does not disappear. Not even if the civilization became totally extinct like with the Mayan Civilization. So your argument for a prehistoric 'goldern age' followed by a 'dark age' is seriously flawed. It's no more than a clumsy ploy to explain the 'lack of any evidence' we have for an advanced prehistoric civilization you (and others) claim built Stonehenge. It goes along with your 'all wood' culture which decayed leaving behind no evidence.

    We know that the Romans occupied UK some 2000 years ago. We also know that the Romans knew and used similar 'building techiques' found at Stonehenge. So the most natural logical conclusion is that any clearly 'man made markings' found at Stonehenge are likely Roman and later.

    I am still waiting for your top three reasons why you think Stonehenge was made by prehistoric people!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      Sadly, you missed the point again - we are NOT comparing DNA with Blood type - they both exist so we need to look at both!!

      You own argument defeats your evidence for Haplogroups as they have only been identified in the last 10 years and are based on existing populations, which as you have out already pointed out, have been heavy migrated. Blood types are much older and based on pre-migration period of the 20th Century and therefore more accurate, in regards to anomalies such as Rh detection.

      "The theory[Solutrean origins] is largely discounted by most professionals" you will find that this was prior to the discovery of 'Kennewick Man'. The fact that a Cro-magnon has been found in the ground, clearly shows that migration is a FACT - otherwise tells us where the hell did he come from??

      If you wish to disprove the 'A' Rh- blood, then lets have some scientific evidence as its like me claiming Niels Bohr theory of Quantum Physics is wrong, because I say so!

      Finally, as for Romans occupying the UK for 2000 years - well this highlights my problem with you, but on this occasion we'll forgive your ignorance of history as a typo - try 400. For Stonehenge pre-dates Roman Empire by about at least 2000 years - the proof is the carbon dating of the seven antler picks in the ditches dated at 2100 - 2300BCE, another antler pick under fallen stone 23 dated at 4200BCE, Charcoal found in the mound in the centre of Stonehenge dated at 6200BCE, the three piece of post hole charcoal in the car park dated at 8500BC.

      That's 12 pieces of SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE showing prehistoric occupation.

      Delete
  21. Kostas, I am delighted you finally decided to engage your brain instead of making personal attacks. I think your fundamental point that "everything is made by Earth" is cranky in the extreme, but nevertheless your points above have some merit and I look forward to Robert's observations.

    The accepted wisdom is that migration to US in pre-history happened via an Asian bridge, and in recent times via a West-East migration that is well documented. This is supported by DNA work and blood analysis. Yet, the more I research into blood type with Native Americans the more differences I see - it may be convenient for "Washington" to see native america as a single entity but this is not true according the evidence. It is sad that Americans seem to have done so little investigation into their own native history, although this is changing. I am very curious why their is evidence for Solutrean tools in the East, while the Blackfoot are living in Montana - there seems no easy connection.

    Perhaps Robert's next book will explain everything and I commit to buy a copy.

    You need to get over your prejudice on Stonehenge. I think you have been there? My top three reasons for it having been built by human kind are:
    - the evidence for deliberate construction
    - the links with astronomical connections - too many for coincidence
    - the context of the "sacred landscape" (barrows, cursus, Avebury, Glastonbury, Durrington. etc)

    Having seen Bubba's shot out of the woods on the 10th at Augusta last night I believe that God can do anything for a true Christian - still I think Stonehenge was built by man and anyone who thinks otherwise is completely nuts.

    Why is this not Roman? RC dating for one, and second the Romans could write so had they rebuilt it they would have written about it. The archaeological record is convincing too - evolution in burial practice and ways of living.

    Was this an "advanced civilization? Depends what you mean by "civilization" and "advanced". Does it really matter, or are these judgements for later? It seems to me incontrovertible that Stonehenge was built by people who were organized and with a shared purpose.

    Robert is postulating a wave of influence around 10k BC in US, I think. The tool evidence would point earlier I think although, as you say, many disagree that this was an imported technology. It might just be coincidence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris/Kostas

      Your quite right I didn't answer Kostas enquiry fully.

      Haplogroup Q -

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_(Y-DNA)

      Clearly shows the original migration - hence the South American intensity of type and only marginal in Asia - but some and none in Europe.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA)

      The R Haplogroup shows "R1 is the second most important haplogroup in Indigenous peoples of the Americas following haplogroup Q, and spreads specially in Algonquian peoples from United States and Canada.[9]" Wiki

      Shows clear signs of Spread from Europe via Iceland and Greenland to America supporting my Hypothesis. On its own its not conclusive but linked with the Blood type Rh- is compelling.

      RJL

      Delete
  22. Robert,

    If you wish to argue DNA evidence is not as reliable as 'blood type' you will be arguing against the best science and be putting your whole hypothesis at risk of being discredited. If 'blood type' was more reliable, why are DNA tests always used to determine fatherhood in disputed pregnancies?

    You write,

    You own argument defeats your evidence for Haplogroups as they have only been identified in the last 10 years and are based on existing populations, which as you have out already pointed out, have been heavy migrated. Blood types are much older and based on pre-migration period of the 20th Century and therefore more accurate, in regards to anomalies such as Rh detection.


    You seem to confuse when something is 'known' and when something is 'true'! The whole human genome has been identified less than 20 years ago! Does that mean ancient people did not have human DNA? The distinct DNA halpogroups identified for American Indians have not changed for more than 20,000 years while the 'blood type' transmitted from father to child can change in just one night of careless sex. Furthermore, since the DNA halpogroups have been traced to East Asia while migration from Asia was far less than from Europe, your argument whichever way analyzed is spurious to put it politely.

    The wikipedia article I referenced in my quotes is post 'Kennewick Man'. Check it out if you don't believe me! The following is a direct quote from the wikipedia article
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennewick_Man)

    Kennewick Man was not European but most resembled the "Ainu"[4] and "Polynesians".[8] Powell said that the "Ainu" descend from the Jōmon people who are an "east Asian" population with "closest biological affinity with south-east Asians rather than western Eurasian peoples".[9] Furthermore, Powell said that dental analysis showed the skull had a "94 percent" chance of being a "Sundadont" group like the "Ainu" and "Polynesians" and only a "48 percent" chance of being a "Sinodont" group like that of "north Asia".[8] Powell said analysis of the skull showed it to be "unlike American Indians and Europeans".[8] Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid" unless "Ainu" and "Polynesians" are considered "Caucasoid".[9]


    It stands the reason! If the Kennewick Man was a European, wont he likely have been found in Maine or Nova Scotia along the East Coast rather than in Washington State far off the Pacific Northwest? You have to think things through carefully and thoroughly Robert. Rather than letting your emotions and book sales take control of your reasoning.

    Robert, read my lips! I said the Roman occupation 2000 year AGO! It's hard enough straightening out your warped reasoning, but when you also twist my own statements it get down right unpleasant and boring.

    Dating deer antlers does not prove Stonehenge was built by prehistoric people! Neither does 'occupancy' prove 'construction'. Your followers will follow you over this logical cliff, however.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  23. Kostas

    I did answer your DNA comment in reply to Chris with Further evidence.

    Who's Powell?? you might as well quoted Brian Johnson!!

    If you don't believe RC dating - I can't help you.

    RJL

    ReplyDelete
  24. Chris,

    You write,“I am delighted you finally decided to engage your brain instead of making personal attacks”

    Don't flatter yourself! I have always engaged my brain with or without you. But when I am personally attacked, I will respond! You don't like it? Don't engage in it. Crank is not a characterization I take lightly.

    But if you have followed any of my many posts in Brian's and in Robert's blog, mine stand out as being most thorough, most detailed, to the point-by-point and seriously debating the issues.

    I am only interested in an open and honest debate. One that allows the questioning of the most fundamental assumptions we make. In the case of Stonehenge and the other prehistoric sites, this is 'human agency'.

    I know questioning 'human agency' in these blogs is not a popular position to take. I don't do it lightly and recklessly. I am sensitive to all the intellectual and psychological investments made here. I believe truth is the surest way forward, however. But if we are to arrive at truth, we often must do the unpopular. Even at the threat of banishment as you were too willing to encourage for me.

    You write, You need to get over your prejudice on Stonehenge.

    Nothing can be further from the truth! My intellectual attitude is the opposite of prejudice in any shape or form. I am only interested in the truth of Stonehenge. Aren't you? But Truth is Round! And all perspectives must find reflection in it!

    I will get back to your other points latter. But I've been at this now a bit longer than I wished ...

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  25. Robert,

    What I actually said is, “Dating deer antlers does not prove Stonehenge was built by prehistoric people!”

    Where in that statement do I say I don't believe RC dating?
    I am getting very weary of straightening out your twisting of my statements! You either doing it because you don't know what you are doing. Or you are doing it because you know and it's your only sophistic response to my well reasoned arguments.

    In every case, it is a diversion from substantive debate. If you persist, I will desist from further contributions. Don't have the time for such nonsense!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nonsense is to dismiss carbon dating as evidence.

      Clearly, occupation existed on these dates - Stonehenge is man made you have failed to give us any empirical evidence to the contrary so the debate is dead, until you do so!!

      I will no be going over old arguments that you failed to justify.

      RJL

      Delete
  26. Chris,

    As you already know, I am hypothesizing a local ice cover of Salisbury Plain with Stonehenge being a meltwater retaining basin in the ice sheet.

    Under this scenario, the stones were brought to Stonehenge by Nature on the surface of the ice. While prehistoric men pushed the stones over the circular ice edge, dropping them from above embedding these in the muddy chalk bedrock below.

    Opportunistically later the Romans may have then modified the already existing stone arrangements by adding some lintels and dressing some of the stones. But like Brian, I also believe Stonehenge was never completed and the Romans may have just abandoned the project with no purpose and no utility. If that is so, why would we expect the Romans to have written reports on a project abandoned and likely senseless? It just wasn't such a big deal for them!

    A prehistoric civilization to have built Stonehenge would have to be very advanced -- being able to move and built with megaliths. Such building techniques like tenon and mortice joining only appear at Stonehenge. This indicates to me such techniques were not known by prehistoric people at large. Otherwise you would expect to see such building methods used elsewhere. Perhaps with palaces and temples and dwellings using smaller stones needing less effort to move and maneuver. The occurrence of such advanced building methods at Stonehenge can best be explained as an isolated Roman agency.

    As for all the RC dating of material found at Stonehenge and elsewhere, I have different explanations for them. On their own, they don't prove 'human agency'. They are simply weaved into a 'human agency' narrative by people that take this as already true.

    As for Robert addressing my DNA arguments, I have yet to see it! He could make it easy on all of us and clearly articulate it point by point so there is no ambiguity and no twisting of statements.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  27. Joseph Powell is an anthropologist at the University of New Mexico. He is an expert in identifying AmerIndian remains and is one of the very few allowed to examine the Kennewick Man.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An anthropologist!!

      Dr. James C. Chatters, a University of Washington specialist in human osteology - and far better qualified than a Anthropologist in these matters.

      RJL

      Delete
  28. Robert,

    Quoting directly from your own references in your comment:

    from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_Q_(Y-DNA):

    Haplogroup Q is the predominant Y-chromosome haplogroup in indigenous peoples of the Americas.

    The frequency of haplogroup Q in Norway and Sweden is about 3%, while 2,5% of Slovak males are in haplogroup Q.

    Likely due to its origin in Central Asia, haplogroup Q may be found throughout Asia.[2]


    from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_R_(Y-DNA) :


    Y-haplogroup R is found throughout all continents, but is fairly common throughout Europe, South Asia and Central Asia.

    It is important in Native Americans and it also occurs in Caucasus, Near East, West China, Siberia and some parts of Africa.


    Robert you write,

    [this evidence] Shows clear signs of Spread from Europe via Iceland and Greenland to America supporting my Hypothesis.

    Really? Can you explain how the scientific evidence supports your hypothesis? More slight-of-logic?

    And what does it have to do with Stonehenge? If we can't find evidence for a prehistoric culture to have build Stonehenge we'll just look further back in the human genome and farther wide in every corner of the globe to find something to pass as evidence!

    Such extremes prove there are no means to that ellusive advanced prehistoric Stonehenge civilization. Calling it Atlantis does not change that!

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kostas

      You need to learn to read more carefully.

      Haplogroup Q was from Africa and the INITIAL humanoid for America - so why are you giving percentages from Europe? These people carried the 'o' blood group and were probably Homo Erectus in origin - see new post for details.

      Look at the map of the R Haplogroup - ignore the present day levels due to migration and concentrate on the hot spots - R is from EUROPE and the hot spots are Britain, Ireland, Iceland, Greenland and Canada EAST. as predicted!!

      We have now shown Blood and DNA evidence as YOU requested - now go back take a good look at the new blog and video and come back with something a bit more informed.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. And what does it have to do with Stonehenge?

      Everything!!

      If The builders are an advanced civilisation - which clearly they are - this would reflect in where they travelled and what areas they traded with and populated - for even someone as sceptical as you would admit that a civilisation that crossed the Atlantic was a greater civilisation such as the Romans, Greek and Egyptian - who could not!!

      It will also show that this rubbish about writing is not linked to civilisation.

      RJL

      Delete
    3. Whatever! I'll let you bask in your darkness …

      Kostas

      Delete
  29. Kostas, thank you for taking the time to review my remarks. I am not persuaded by your theories at all.

    You look for collateral evidence of palaces and fixed buildings, even temples. All these things say much more about the culture than they do about the capability of the people

    To understand Stonehenge we need to understand the context and the beliefs. They DID NOT build palaces, so now go figure! They DID seem to build temples - at least I don't know another word to describe what can be seen at Stonehenge, Avebury, Boyne Valley, Callanish, Orkney, Carnac, etc, etc. Perhaps recent historians have been overly influenced by the Egyptian obsession with monumental death at a similar time, but all these remains seem to me to be closely associated with life. Purely a personal view, you understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris you write,

      “They [Stonehenge Civilization] DID NOT build palaces, so now go figure!”

      Assuming “they [Stonehenge Civilization]” existed, we have a non-explanation for the lack of evidence. “go figure!”

      Assuming “they [Stonehenge Civilization]” did not exist, we have an explanation for the lack of evidence. No need to “go figure!”

      I ask, which of the two premises leads to a more certain logical conclusion?

      Kostas

      Delete
  30. Chris you write,

    My top three reasons for it [Stonehenge] having been built by human kind are:
    - the evidence for deliberate construction
    - the links with astronomical connections - too many for coincidence
    - the context of the "sacred landscape" (barrows, cursus, Avebury, Glastonbury, Durrington. etc)


    Thank you for your direct and honest response to my question. I have asked others the same question (including Brian and Robert and GeoCur) but none of them were willing to answer it as honestly and directly as you have.

    I will spare you agonizing debates over each of the reasons you listed. But if each of these can be explained by other means (not 'human agency') would you be able to question 'human agency'? Or is 'human agency' a core conviction deeper than any reason.

    I respect your views. And unless you wish to pursue this further, I will not burden you with mine.

    Kostas

    ReplyDelete
  31. As for Stonehenge it is a similar astronomic building as Aryan Arkaim in Kazakstan it also lays on the same parallel.
    Arkaim was built earlier than 17 thousands years ago.
    It was highly developed culture which produced iron before Romans did... it started on steppes of Asia when climate changed for warm and good for agriculture and they population grew rapidly making creating cities possible - they also quickly domesticated horses what gave them big advantage - their genes are all over Asia and slavic countries.
    Later Aryan/Scythian empire conquered North India, West China, large part of Asia. They were praslavs and Slavs in East Europe still use more less the same languages and it is similar with sanskrit in which late Aryans wrote Veda-s - book of knowledge (wiedza in Polish). They also conquered Asia Minor and Troy was inhabited by one of Aryanic/Praslavic tribe, the same as Crete island (Kreta - from Skryta = hidden, Minotaur=Taur-os of Minos, Tauros means bull and polish Tur for aurochs/bull (as Torro in spanish).
    But the biggest problem with researching this culture is that they didn't write anything because their culture was a verbal one. They memorised everything and treated their language as sacred because it contained all their knowledge and was created in big part for explaining astonomic phenomena (like Illiada and Odysey was at first in verbal form and written much later). Romans couldn't cross borders of their Aryan/Scythian/Sarmatian/Praslavic empire.
    They also used that method with stones for time measument.
    Their god was sun god Ra (yup they reached Egypt too) and they used swastica - sign of sun from swasti = world/sacred/light (in polish sviat/swiety/swiatlo - they used precise language with hidden konwledge about their knowledge/vision of world in it). They burried dead in kurhans.

    Unofficialy some thinks Greeks took alphabet and some words from that east lands of Aryans and that Etruscans were praslavs/Aryans too (their runic langauge is decrypted only in slavic).

    So Aryan trail is quite interesting and that Arkaim place even more mysterious than Atlantis, since it actually is material now, open for visiting and research (btw it has shape of two circles... like Atlantis... and big walls but it was never attacked).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon

      Arkaim is indeed of similar design to Stonehenge - I would suggest that Stonehenge was built at the same time as Arkaim as my book 'The Stonehenge Enigma' has proven and therefore was built by the same civilisation.

      I would also suggest that this civilisation did not conquer as such but traded with the other civilisations in India, Middle East and China and as a consequence left behind settlers in these continents. This trading continued for thousands of years, even beyond the Roman Empire Period and can clearly be seen by the grave goods of the Atlantean's Scandinavian ancestors 'the vikings' as remarkably they still had the same trade routes accessible by boat even in the 7th century AD, including Constantinople and China.

      These trading routes as you quite rightly indicated would leave 'echoes' of the ancient Atlantean race which is current viewed by some scholars as Aryan and can easily be identified by their stone constructions, sacred mythology and physical attributes.

      RJL

      Delete
    2. "But the biggest problem with researching this culture is that they didn't write anything because their culture was a verbal one." This is correct and to understand why we must look at the adage 'you are what you eat' - recently alzheimer's (memory loss) has been attributed to poor diet. We know that Cro-Magnon's had perfect diets and hence they were over 6' 3" tall and had a 20% larger brain than us. This larger brain would not suffer from memory loss as homo sapiens have today.

      If you have perfect memory (eidetic) you do not need to write and individuals can send messages verbally. The only reason writing was invented is when we turned to agriculture for food our statue diminished including our brains and memory loss occurred.

      Socrates is a clear Cro-Magnon as he never wrote a word as he had a perfect memory and hence the ancient senate requirement to make speeches without notes as it indicated the individual was of 'noble birth' and intelligence.

      RJL

      Delete