Viable Nephite colonies

[notHagoth7]

And if seagoing were really a highly developed skill among some, there is not reason if this is the narrow neck of land that there couldn't be both Atlantic and Pacific launch sites.

Yes. If the west sea is the Atlantic and they sailed Hagoth's largest ship northward into it, that leaves verses 7 and 8 to allow for potential Pacific launch(es).

Or flip that on its head.

[charity]

Perhaps you are not aware of overwhelming evidence to the contrary because you do not conisder it when presented to you. We know that Stephen Mack was interested in the Irish Catholic MS in question and may well have shared his interest and the script with Joseph Smith.

However, it really does not matter where Joseph Smith got the 17th century script. The fact is that it was available to Joseph Smith in terms of time and place.

What you seem to be forgetting is the the script that Joseph Smith claimed was "Reformed' Egyptian (no matter where he got it), was not "Reformed Egyptian", or any type of Egyptian or Hebrew, or any other Semitic language or script. This means that Joseph Smith was, in fact, lying when he said that it was "Reformed Egyptian".

And in believing his story, you are choosing to believe what has been documented as a lie. That is not faith, and it is certainly not "knowledge". It is magical thinking.

I agree that it would be better to return to the thread topic. However, your insistent expressions of unfounded belief need to be addressed for what they are.

I did a little reading up on the topic. You very blithely ignore several facts. One, the Roman scribe concocted a system of 4,000 symbols, which was expanded to over 5,000 early on. With 5,000 symbols to pick through, you could show similarities with any number of small sets of characters. You could probably put a chicken's foot in ink, set it on a piece of paper, and then find a number of similar characters from ordinary hen scratching.

And you should have used Richard Stout's own statement that showing that material was somewhere in the environment is a far cry from proving that Joseph had access to it. You seem to have neglected that in your ill advised use of the phrase "documented as a lie." Shame on you.

[notHagoth7]

Apologies to those following this thread, but I'm going to postpone my planned initial comments on cultural diffusion, linguistics, and the Aesir/Vanir.

Taking a look at current thread activity, a lot has been added to this thread in the last 24 hours, including links to three external chapters for additional reading (some of which also contain recommendations for even further reading), so I want to give you room to digest that, and don't want to push things to the point of cognitive overload. Thanks in advance for being flexible/understanding w/me on that.

I hope those of you who were claiming there was no substance to the OP are rapidly beginning to realize otherwise, (??) and I trust that you have more than enough from today's posts to chew on for the next day or so.

So in the meantime, to take a step back and assess where we're at:

What resonates for you so far? Does anything seem overstated? And is there anything that doesn't seem to add up?

Any comments on the geography chapter?

What about your thoughts on the seafaring Shield, on his place in European tradition (including the chronology for his appearance), and on the external chapter about him? (He is a complete stud.)

Any comments on the whale path chapter?

Has this initial foray into the topic equipped anyone with greater confidence in dealing with the Tironian/Anthon manuscript issue?

And are there requests for information on related subtopics that haven't surfaced yet?

[rodheadlee]

The ocean currents are certainly favorable for voyaging between Europe and the Americas with a counter clockwise circumnavigation of the North Atlantic. The winds are favorable too. I haven't yet found a suitable wind map to post. Great thread, much to study. Thanks.

[notHagoth7]

Could we start with the European people known as Nephites? That's intriguing.

Along the coast of northern Europe, a people who called themselves Cannanefates suddenly appeared.

Linguists/philologists disagree what the name of that people might mean. Some have posited "leek-masters"

Others say Canna refers to a reed. Another possibility is that it is semitic in origin, and means lowland (Some say that Canaan has the same meaning.)

However, early languages in northern Europe like Gothic and Anglo-Saxon posit another likelihood, a cognate of the modern word "kin": "

[notHagoth7]

The ocean currents are certainly favorable for voyaging between Europe and the Americas with a counter clockwise circumnavigation of the North Atlantic. The winds are favorable too. I haven't yet found a suitable wind map to post. Great thread, much to study. Thanks.

Good contribution. As mentioned in one of the chapters I linked to earlier, the Gulf Stream was also the migration path for whales - which would have been a stunning, memorable sight (before the whales were thinned out by modern whaling) for any ancient seafarer. No one would forget such a sight. Thus the "whale path" mentioned in Beowulf, sandwiched between the arrival and burial-by-sea departure of Shield, may have a very specific visual origin. It could be an allusion, not just to the ocean, but to the most significant whale migration path in the North Atlantic.

It could be a very important clue to our heritage.

[ERayR]

You are asking the question as if "reformed Egyptian", as being discussed here, were more than a figment of Joseph Smith's imagination.

I see a great deal of evidence that it was a figment of his imagination and, so far anyway, no evidence whatsoever that it was not.

ARC has spoken. So let it be written. So let it be done. Yes your highness.

[Arc]

ARC has spoken. So let it be written. So let it be done. Yes your highness.

Come on, ERayR, lighten up.

We are all here to learn.

I just haven't seen anything yet that I find credible in notHogath7's speculations. Each time I look at what he is proposing, the weight of evidence mitigates against it. However, I am still here reading and waiting. If I see something that is convincing, I will certainly say so.

Charity accused me of not reading the Book of Mormon. In fact I started studying the Book of Mormon in high school seminary class and continued to read and study it for some 20 years thereafter. I also read Hugh Nibley and other apologist writings trying to make excuses as to why there is no physical evidence for Book of Mormon historicity.

[notHagoth7]

We are all here to learn.

I just haven't seen anything yet that I find credible in notHogath7's speculations. Each time I look at what he is proposing, the weight of evidence mitigates against it.

Arc,

Can we be specific? Where's the weight of evidence that mitigates against:

1) Shield's arrival on the coast of Europe (per Beowulf), or against

2) his prominent place in medieval North Atlantic self identity and origin accounts (per dozens of other medieval accounts), and/or against

3) a mid-first-century BC suggestion for his arrival on the scene (based on the testimony of two separate Icelandic manuscripts)?

I'm not insisting that you (or anyone else) acknowledge him to be a Nephite.

But which of the above three assertions are outweighed by other evidence? And to precisely what evidence are you referring?

[notHagoth7]

If we're going to be asserting things about weight of evidence, here's some of the evidence for the existence and importance of Shield (and his origins) in northern Europe:

Century Source

8th-11th Beowulf

9th-12th Anglo-Saxon Chronicle

9th Asser, Life of King Alfred

10th/11th AEthelweard, Chronicon AEthelweardi

11th West-Saxon Regnal List from 494 to Reign of AEthelred

12th Textus Roffensis

12th William of Malmesbury, Gesta Regum Anglorum

12th John of Worcester, Chronicon ex Chronicis

12th Simeon of Durham, Historia Regum

12th Roger of Hoveden, Chronica Magistri

13th Roger of Wendorver, Libri qui dicitur Flores Historiarum

13th Matthew Paris, Chronica Majora

13th Matthew Paris, Historia Anglorum

13th The Red Book of the Exchequer

13th Batholomew of Cotton, Historia Anglicana (AD 449-1298)

14th Chronica Buriensis (The Chronicle of Bury St. Edmunds)

14th Matthew of Westminster, Flores Historiarum

14th Richard of Cirencester, Speculum Historiale de gestis regum Angliae

14th Eulogium Historiarum sive Temporibus

15th A Chronicle Roll of Henry VI

But that's only some of the English testimony. So it's merely the tip of the European iceberg.

I don't want to bog down the thread with a list of relevant witnesses from some of the Scandinavian countries.

That should suffice to provide a glimpse of the weight of what I'm asserting for Shield's importance in early North Sea self identity.

The fun part in this is that we don't know Shield's original name. According to one of the earliest Danish chronicles, Shield got his name from his deeds.

But we'll probably get back to that fun vacuum later.

[Arc]

Arc,

Can we be specific? Where's the weight of evidence that mitigates against:

1) Shield's arrival on the coast of Europe (per Beowulf), or against

2) his prominent place in medieval North Atlantic self identity and origin accounts (per dozens of other medieval accounts), and/or against

3) a mid-first-century BC suggestion for his arrival on the scene (based on the testimony of two separate Icelandic manuscripts)?

I'm not insisting that you (or anyone else) acknowledge him to be a Nephite.

But which of the above three assertions are outweighed by other evidence? And to precisely what evidence are you referring?

If you are now claiming that your three critical path assertion are those listed above, then at this point, I have no evidence that would mitigate against them. However, at this point I also do not yet see them as relevant to the issue at hand.

As far as some of your other statements made to lay the groundwork for Nephites in ancient Ireland, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

The one I find most unlikely based on evidence is to the effect that "reformed Egyptian" writing was used in the Yucatan during Book of Mormon times and is not found there now because of the climate.

Open ocean vessels and navigation technology needed to get from the Yucatan to Ireland are also problematic. I do a lot of ocean sailing, and can tell you that the ocean current data posted earlier is a relatively minor issue even if you are going to claim barges. Please tell us you are not going to claim Jaredite-type barges of driftboats as your open ocean means of conveyance.

Also, as a preview for the kind of corroborating evidence you will eventually need; anyone seriously considering your proposal will be looking for a plausible argument as to why the migratory patterns indicated by human mitochondrial DNA simply do not support a genetic background for Irish or Celtic populations that transits through the New World from the Middle East.

Application of human genetiic information to historical human population migration patterns has been shown to be remarkably self-consistent and reliable in determining who went where and when. I fear the biggest challenge to your proposal will come from this ever-expanding and more reliable data set.

[notHagoth7]

If you are now claiming that your three critical path assertion are those listed above, then at this point, I have no evidence that would mitigate against them.

Great! Then we're off to a fun start.

However, at this point I also do not yet see them as relevant to the issue at hand.

Fair enough. (It's still quite early in the game.)

As far as some of your other statements made to lay the groundwork for Nephites in ancient Ireland, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

But Shield is the groundwork.

The one I find most unlikely based on evidence is to the effect that "reformed Egyptian" writing was used in the Yucatan during Book of Mormon times and is not found there now because of the climate.

OK. I already acknowledged that the climate issue wasn't a valid argument, and that I know almost nothing about Mesoamerica.

If your concern is genuine, and you really DO want an answer, why not simply launch a thread like I suggested last weekend?

There are plenty of competent American specialists in the forum who might be of help.

And it's not a showstopper to the heart of what we're discussing here.

Open ocean vessels and navigation technology needed to get from [strikeout]the Yucatan[/strikeout] [the Americas] to Ireland are also problematic.

Yep. We'll get to initial glimpses of some of that technology. From contemporary eyewitness testimony, from archaeology, and from oral tradition.

I do a lot of ocean sailing, and can tell you that the ocean current data posted earlier is a relatively minor issue even if you are going to claim barges. Please tell us you are not going to claim Jaredite-type barges of driftboats as your open ocean means of conveyance.

Nope. No barge claims here. We'll be talking about sails all a-flutter. I'll get to some of that in the linguistic-Aesir-Vanir content. And I intend to expand upon it further in a discussion of the Langobards and Gaul.

Also, as a preview for the kind of corroborating evidence you will eventually need; anyone seriously considering your proposal will be looking for a plausible argument as to why the migratory patterns indicated by human mitochondrial DNA simply do not support a genetic background for Irish or Celtic populations that transits through the New World from the Middle East.

That's likely true for some of those from the outside looking in.

While I imagine DNA is less of an issue for those who already believe the Nephite record.

That said, I actually look forward to the DNA implications - and I am watching a few interesting leads in that direction that are starting to bud. But I'll likely leave such discussions/research for others - since most of my time is committed to other aspects of European culture, and I don't pretend to be a geneticist. (Although I did sleep at a Holiday Inn.)

Application of human genetiic information to historical human population migration patterns has been shown to be remarkably self-consistent and reliable in determining who went where and when. I fear the biggest challenge to your proposal will come from this ever-expanding and more reliable data set.

Perhaps. Time will tell. Good input.

[notHagoth7]

If you are now claiming that your three critical path assertion are those listed above...

Yes. It has been the foundation since early in the discussion (see posts 16 and 19.)

Beowulf's introduction of Shield lays the groundwork for the entire discussion.

[notHagoth7]

Language

(I'm pulling bits and pieces of this from some other things I've written - so please be forgiving if a few of the transitions are a bit choppy.)

Linguists assert that as much as 1/3 of the words in the Germanic languages (English, Dutch, Scandinavian languages, etc.) derive from some source other than Indo-European. (per John Hawkins, in p. 71 of Comrie's "The World's Major Languages.")

The odd thing about such a statement is that the Germanic languages themselves are said to descend from the Indo-European language group. So what's going on here? Clearly, behind the veil of history, another culture or cultures interacted with the branch of Indo-European that is now in northern Europe, and left its fingerprints in the current vocabulary.

What's interesting is the type of words this unknown culture imprinted upon Germanic society. Instead of being trivial words, they gravitate around certain areas of meaning. This especially includes terms relating to seafaring, warfare/weaponry, society/government, and agriculture. So whatever this external culture was, it was relatively advanced, and apparently respected, by proto-Germanic society.

To demonstrate that culture's impact on English seafaring/navigation terms, some of the words in our language that don't derive from Indo-European include: sea, ship, strand, rudder, mast, ebb, steer, sail, north, south, east, west. In other words, it's quite possible that proto-Germanic society didn't even have terms for some of these things until it made contact with the more advanced seafaring culture.

That the other culture wasn't Indo-European means that we can rule out Romans, Celts, and a whole slew of other people in Europe and areas further East as potential sources for any of those terms. So where did such seafaring/navigation terms come from? Clearly, they had to come from a seafaring people, whoever they were.

For now, I won't burden the thread with some of the other terms and semantic fields which these people introduced into Western Civilization. But why was their influence so great upon the Germanic languages, contrasted to surrounding peoples? And why do many of our seafaring/navigation terms come from them?

Shield may hold part of that answer. If we recall, he was a seafaring child, who arrived on the coast of Europe in the 1st century BC.

The very terms we use today for seafaring/navigation may trace to the infusion he and his seafaring culture brought into Europe.

In fact Shield's son was said to be the first king among the Danes. And "king" also happens to be one of the English/Germanic terms that is not Indo-European in origin. King was a term (and perhaps even a concept) introduced into the region by another culture. Perhaps by Shield's seafaring culture.

Whoever these people were, they introduced (or seriously left their imprint on) seafaring, government, agriculture, and warfare. Notably, these are four areas where Nephite culture excelled. Such a people would likely have been appreciated, welcomed, and respected by the typical farmer for the improvements they brought to armaments, defense, seafaring, agriculture, and more.

That's a brief intro to the testimony of modern linguists that a sizable portion of our language came to northern Europe's shore - through the language of a foreign-speaking seafaring people. What does that have to say about Shield's arrival (and departure) by sea? The only thing it MUST say is that the people wouldn't have even been able to pass down the story of Shield without access to such words.

For they needed that vocabulary just to describe Shield's ship, keel, sail, etc.

Moreover, closer to the epicenter of the cultural implications here, the word Shield itself is one of the words the seafaring culture in question introduced into the Germanic tongues.

For he was a Shield to his people. I highly recommend people explore further into the nature of Shield. He was a fascinating character - a patriarch of an intriguing migration.

Does this prove a connection between a seafaring non-Indo-European culture and Shield's infusion ca. 50 BC?

Well, no. But that's not my intent. I'm here to present and discuss the evidence.

It might be convincing for some. But even then, we're still just getting started.

And does it prove a correlation between Nephites and the seafaring infusion into northern Europe?

No. But it sure packs some potential corroborating evidence, since the seafaring Nephite culture excelled in the same four cultural areas as the seafaring culture in question. I look forward to seeing future linguistic studies that cast further light on that region. (Brian Stubbs & Royal Skousen - are you out there?)

I posit that this influx of seafaring people, whoever one deems them to be, played a considerable role in the sound shifts, vocabulary shifts, and syntax of northern Europe.

As to where these non-Indo-Europeans lived, I am tentatively of the opinion that one of the regions they colonized was in the area referred to by some as the Nordwest Block. A coastal region sandwiched between the Celts to the West, and the Germanic peoples to the East. An area that allowed them to integrate with and influence both neighboring cultures. Notably, this also happens to be the region from which the Saxons left the continent, centuries later, to colonize Britain/England. And it also happens to be the region inhabited by the Cannanefates.

Thoughts?

Next, we'll probably take an even closer look at the introduction of seafaring technology into the region, by exploring the Nordic narrative that tells about the struggle between two early cultures, represented by the Aesir and the Vanir. I believe the narrative of this struggle contains fly-in-the-amber clues that provide us a better glimpse of the seafaring culture in question.

[notHagoth7]

Here's a quick sketch of the topics we've touched on so far:

Gulf Stream = whale migration path

Seafaring language influx =? Nordwest block ?= Shield's arrival (1st century BC) --> Canna-nefates (shield raising)

Shield's pregnant-with-meaning request for burial-at-sea = Joseph-in-Egypt's final request

Tiro@Rome > Tironian Script > Ireland > Detroit Manuscript

[Cold Steel]

I think burying such evidence would be utterly irresponsible and dishonest. There are at least three ways to lie with regard to evidence: 1) by manufacturing it, 2) by destroying it, 3) or by hiding it, which is effectively the same as #2.

There's a certain snobbery that is intrinsic in established science, regardless of the field. Dr. Jerry Ainsworth, who's been accused of buying into many fanciful finds that are fakes or counterfeits, tells this story:

I...mailed a picture of the same side of the stela, (that I had shown to Dr. Lounsbury), to Michael Coe, also a Maya authority at Yale. I received a response from Michael Coe in which he said,

[notHagoth7]

There is a "too good to be true" mentality that exists, and it exists for good reason. But like the death penalty, sometimes mistakes are made. Sometimes good science is rejected because it violated this maxim. Back when the Dead Sea Scrolls were first discovered, the fragments were meted out to scholars who were sworn to secrecy and forbidden to share their findings. It wasn't until the scholars were allowed to get together and virtually forced to show their hand that we began to get an accurate view of what they were all about.

For the record, my intent was not to impugn the reputation of Ray Matheny or anyone else (thx for bringing the quote to the thread). He sounds like a very talented, intelligent individual, and there are probably a few things I'd like to talk with him about some day.

However, I simply didn't understand the mindset/motivation behind hiding a discovery - regardless of what one initially thinks about what was found.

And I still don't understand it - but I would seriously like to.

[Gary@rics]

And you are a certified expert in Reformed Egyptian? Parden me but you are the one enamoured with proper degrees attached to your name so please produce.

ERayR, I find this hollow. We all know that there is no such as thing as certification in Reformed Egyptian, so you can't meaningfully argue that lacking such a credential undermines Arc. Arc is questioning the legitimacy of the whole claim of divine translation of the Book of Mormon. It's a genuine thing to question. LDS missionaries invite investigators to do that exact thing every day. Even Moroni's promise is worded that way: ask if these things are not true. Arc is doing that, although not in a way favoring official LDS history. President Hinkley told the world that either Joseph Smith was a true prophet or he was a fraud. Whether one is devout LDS, neutral, or determinedly non-LDS, it's a question that merits full examination. The origin of the Anthon characters is a great new means of asking.

I personally think the evidence so far leans toward "fraud" as the answer. Here we have original Book of Mormon characters, stunningly similar to a set of mysterious figures that were possibly or even probably available to Joseph Smith. Church historians concede that young Joseph was caught up in some youthful shenanigans, including treasure hunting that never yielded treasure. Pilfering ancient-looking material is a piece of the puzzle that fits well enough.

Actually, I worry that now anything I say will be questioned. At least you know where I stand.

So I have a bias and want to know more. I don't know where the evidence will point when I've reviewed enough to satisfy me. I can stay undecided and curious for a very long time. The only promising current alternative hypothesis is the one proposed by NotHagoth7. That's why I'm reading this thread, to see if his ideas--and those that branch out from here--outcompete the fraud hypothesis. There will be other ideas offered in the future. As I see it, unless there is a convincing connection between the Book of Mormon story and the figures shown to Anthon, fraud is the better explanation, at least for these particular characters. NotHagoth7's ideas are worth reading and considering. So are the ideas that run contrary. They all address the same valid question.

We are lucky to have NotHagoth7, someone who who is sufficiently invested in this topic to adopt "Hagoth" in his name. Clearly he has already considered related evidence, studying these lines of evidence long before most of us ever heard about the alleged subterfuge of the Anthon characters. How many other people are there in the entire world who have previously considered these things this way? So let's come together with all the insight, knowledge, skepticism, and spirited discussion that we can muster.

I plan to continue reading both NotHagoth7 and Arc and anything else that leads me to a comfortable conclusion about the Anthon characters.

Gary@rics

[notHagoth7]

All three were written by Christians.

And one of those three, Tolkien, was one of the greatest medieval scholars to walk the planet.

Here's what Tolkien had to say about Beowulf's account of Shield's burial at sea:

Shield "went back to some mysterious land whence he had come.

He came out of the Unknown beyond the Great Sea, and returned into It:

a miraculous intrusion into history."

[notHagoth7]

Actually, I worry that now anything I say will be questioned. At least you know where I stand.

Doubting is allowed. You haven't slipped at all in credibility with me. In fact I find your honesty refreshing.

The point, somewhere along the road, is to move towards something more grounded.

But stay in your current holding pattern for as long as you deem appropriate.

So I have a bias and want to know more. I don't know where the evidence will point when I've reviewed enough to satisfy me. I can stay undecided and curious for a very long time. The only promising current alternative hypothesis is the one proposed by NotHagoth7. That's why I'm reading this thread, to see if his ideas--and those that branch out from here--outcompete the fraud hypothesis. There will be other ideas offered in the future. As I see it, unless there is a convincing connection between the Book of Mormon story and the figures shown to Anthon, fraud is the better explanation, at least for these particular characters.

Then let me fast forward to the rest of the connection.

I've demonstrated that Tiro was presenting a shorthand writing system in Rome, at the right juncture in time to have plausibly arrived with a Hagoth emigration (fifty-five years before Christ's birth - which places the exodus somewhere between 61 BC and 55 BC, depending on one's assumptions about Herod's reign, etc. I can demonstrate why later, but I'm of the opinion that the the two years of Hagoth's migrations were roughly 60 and 59 BC.) Of course that timeline doesn't prove anything more than that the pieces of the proposed European Nephite puzzle CAN fit nicely, as far as chronology goes.

However, I've also demonstrated the correlations with Shield. That the Nephite Hagoth, the North-Sea-hero Shield, and the young slave Tiro were all contemporaries. My premise: all three were part of the same migration.

Question: how could a Nephite Tiro have gotten from northern Europe (where we have extensive evidence of the influx of a foreign-speaking, seafaring people) all the way to Rome? Is such a thing even reasonable?

Based on the timeline - we'll see that it fits the historical facts profoundly well.

Most of us are familiar with Julius Caesar. But few of us are familiar with his career. Deep in debt, Caesar took over governorship of southern Gaul (France), and quickly decided to launch a campaign of conquest into the rest of Gaul (France & Belgium/Holland) in order to amass enough prestige and wealth to wipe out both his financial and political problems. So in 58 BC, he marched into northern France with several legions. Before long, he was conquering peoples left and right.

The context is this. A mere fifteen years earlier, Spartacus had led his slave revolt that devastated Roman confidence and Roman economics. And in the wake of that revolt, tens of thousands of Roman slaves were slaughtered. But the Roman economy was based on slave labor. So what the Republic craved was a continual stream of new slaves. And Caesar decided to be the one to oblige.

During Caesar's seven-year campaign in northern Europe, he captured and sold well over 100,000 people into the slave market. And during that campaign, as a form of paying bonuses to his officers and troops, he granted them some of the captured peoples at no charge. And guess who was one of his officers serving in that campaign? None other than Cicero's only brother. So with the timing of Shield's arrival in northern Europe, if we allow that he may have been part of the Nephite migration, Caesar had means, motive and opportunity to capture as many people as he could - regardless of their origin. But other than the reality that Cicero's brother received slaves as a form of payment in northern Europe, where's the smoking gun that suggests Tiro himself was likely enslaved there?

Here's the first smoking gun: In one of Cicero's personal letters to his brother, he specifically referred to Tiro as "your Tiro." Which strongly suggests Tiro had initially been his brother's servant. Most plausible time of acquisition based on Tiro's young age: his campaign in northern Europe. I posit that as soon as Cicero learned of Tiro's native ability to speedwrite with a phonetic, shorthand writing system, the literary Cicero convinced his brother to transfer Tiro to his own household. And Tiro quickly became Cicero's most trusted servant. He even referred to Tiro as his literary muse, and told others that he could not make progress with the various books he was writing without Tiro. Implication: Tiro played a role helping Cicero brainstorm and phrase some of the greatest works to influence Western Civilization thought on the topics of government, justice, and more. Those very words inspired the founding fathers in their drafting of the American Constitution. In other words, the irony is this, Nephite slave Tiro may have helped establish freedom throughout Western Civilization.

Here's the second smoking gun: While on campaign in northern Gaul, in 54 BC, Cicero's brother bragged at an astonishing feat - he claimed to have written multiple plays in extremely short order. Such speedwriting made Cicero doubt his claim. But that's all we hear about that intriguing exchange. And nowhere else in history, either before or after that episode, does his brother ever demonstrate that skill again. Implication: his new slave Tiro was there, in his service, in northern Gaul - where he discovered his amazing skill at phonetic speedwriting, through which his boast to Cicero was accomplished. And by that autumn, we know for a fact that Tiro was in Cicero's household. This corroborates what I said earlier about the events nine years early, in 63 BC, serving to pique Cicero's interest in improving clerical/stenographic skills.

That's the proposed chain of custody.

1) In northern Europe Tiro either intentionally surrendered to Roman troops or was captured at some point between 58 BC and 54 BC.

2) During that campaign, Tiro came into Cicero's brother's possession, where his phonetic speedwriting skill was discovered by 54 BC. This is substantiated by Cicero's referring to Tiro as "your Tiro" (see above), AND by the exchange between Cicero and his brother about a breathtakingly fast writing accomplishment during the northern campaign.

3) And by the fall of 54 BC, we know from Cicero's letters that Tiro was serving in Cicero's household.

The argument is plausible. And it is grounded in contemporary testimony.

I'm not insisting that others believe that Tironian is related to the Anthon characters.

But I personally believe they are. And I'm confident that if one is going to insist that Tironian IS related to the Anthon characters, this framework provides a much more thorough/reasonable connection of the relevant data points than Stout's limited interpretation.

Which brings us to Keaton and the Detroit Manuscript, which brings us soon to Ireland....I can barely wait.

[notHagoth7]

The implication is this: when one is reading anything written by Cicero after 56 BC - one may well be reading an echo of Nephite thought.

[notHagoth7]

NotHagoth7's ideas are worth reading and considering. So are the ideas that run contrary. They all address the same valid question.

Gary - I appreciate the very kind words. It's actually been an enjoyable opportunity over the last few years digging into the particular's of Stout's premise. And seeing how the side of the evidence he wouldn't consider potentially corroborated much of my other European migration research.

I appreciate your ongoing contribution to the thread.

[notHagoth7]

I was intrigued by the hints you provided in this lead up. I am open to any actual evidence. So far, though, this has been all preface. Please present your facts, preferably something compelling that illustrates a connection between the Book of Mormon and Beowulf

To follow up 48 hours later, how are you doing so far?

Are some of the various correlations between Beowulf's "Shield" and Nephite civilization coming into focus?

• Whale path.
  
• Arrival by boat.
  
• 1st century BC.
  
• Significance of burial at sea.
  
• Language/technology: seafaring, warfare/armaments, agriculture, gov't.
  
• Correlation to shield-hoisting Canna-nefates
  
• Tiro and Cicero's connection to northern Europe
  

(And there's a lot more of ground I may yet choose to cover.)

...or that meaningfully addresses Arc's original posts about a plausible...explanation for the similarities between Joseph Smith's reformed Egyptian characters and the Irish Tironian shorthand.

Are you satisfied w/the first and second halves of the Tironian response?

Is it reasonable? Grounded? Substantive?

(Arc - how about you? Is this thread responding to your Tironian concern with sufficient speed and substance?)

Jeff - how about you? Is this of help at all for you?

So, let's have the main dish: no more teasers.

We're only on about the third course so far, but I hope the patience is paying off.

Hopefully we've moved well beyond the thin-gruel hype into substance that sticks to the roof of whatever.

This is your heritage - on many levels.

[handys003]

Let me give you a little story about Ioa who by Hawaiian folklore sailed about 55 BCE from the Land of Uru considered to be Western S. America up northward to about the pacific northwest then a year later sailed Southwest and landed in Hawaii. Fits Alma 63:5-8

Hawaiians also had folklore of the Old Testament in relation to their creation stories pre-Christian missionaries. Now sorry it's long here but had to scan from my book and copy/paste. You'll find it interesting.

LEGENDS RESEMBLING OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY

REV. C. M. HYDE, D. D.

IN the first volume of Judge Fornander's elaborate work on "The Polynesian Race" he has given some old Hawaiian legends which closely resemble the Old Testament history. How shall we account for such coincidences?

Take, for instance, the Hawaiian account of the Creation. The Kane, Ku, and Lono: or, Sunlight, Substance, and Sound,--these constituted a triad named Ku-Kaua-Kahi, or the Fundamental Supreme Unity. In worship the reverence due was expressed by such epithets as Hi-ka-po-loa, Oi-e, Most Excellent, etc. "These gods existed from eternity, from and before chaos, or, as the Hawaiian term expressed it, 'mai ka po mai' (from the time of night, darkness, chaos). By an act of their will these gods dissipated or broke into pieces the existing, surrounding, all-containing po, night, or chaos. By this act light entered into space. They then created the heavens, three in number, as a place to dwell in; and the earth to be their footstool, he keehina honua a Kane. Next they created the sun,

moon, stars, and a host of angels, or spirits--i kini akua--to minister to them. Last of all they created man as the model, or in the likeness of Kane. The body of the first man was made of red earth--lepo ula, or alaea--and the spittle of the gods--wai nao. His head was made of a whitish clay--palolo--which was brought from the four ends of the world by Lono. When the earth-image of Kane was ready, the three gods breathed into its nose, and called on it to rise, and it became a living being. Afterwards the first woman was created from one of the ribs--lalo puhaka--of the man while asleep, and these two were the progenitors of all mankind. They are called in the chants and in various legends by a large number of different names; but the most common for the man was Kumuhonua, and for the woman Keolakuhonua [or Lalahonua].

"Of the creation of animals these chants are silent; but from the pure tradition it may be inferred that the earth at the time of its creation or emergence from the watery chaos was stocked with vegetable and animal. The animals specially mentioned in the tradition as having been created by Kane were hogs (puaa), dogs (ilio), lizards or reptiles (moo).

"Another legend of the series, that of Wela-ahi-lani, states that after Kane had destroyed the world by fire, on account of the wickedness of the people then living, he organized it as it now is, and created the first man and the first woman, with the assistance of Ku and Lono, nearly in the same manner as narrated in the former legend of Kumuhonua. In this legend the man is called Wela-ahi-lani, and the woman is called Owe."

Of the primeval home, the original ancestral seat of mankind, Hawaiian traditions speak in highest praise. "It had a number of names of various meanings, though the most generally occurring, and said to be the oldest, was Kalana-i-hau-ola (Kalana with the life-giving dew). It was situated in a large country, or continent, variously called in the legends Kahiki-honua-kele, Kahiki-ku, Kapa-kapa-ua-a-Kane, Molo-lani. Among other names for the primary homestead, or paradise, are Pali-uli (the blue mountain), Aina-i-ka-kaupo-o-Kane (the land in the heart of Kane), Aina-wai-akua-a-Kane (the land of the divine water of Kane). The tradition says of Pali-uli, that it was a sacred, tabooed land; that a man must be righteous to attain it; if faulty or sinful he will not get there; if he looks behind he will not get there; if he prefers his family he will not -enter Pali-uli." "Among other adornments of the Polynesian Paradise, the Kalana-i-hau-ola, there grew the Ulu kapu a Kane, the breadfruit tabooed for Kane, and the ohia hemolele, the sacred apple-tree. The priests of the olden time are said to have held that the tabooed fruits of these trees were in some manner connected with the trouble and death of Kumuhonua and Lalahonua, the first man and the first woman. Hence in the ancient chants he is called Kane-laa-uli, Kumu-uli, Kulu-ipo, the fallen chief, he who fell on account of the tree, or names of similar import."

According to those legends of Kumuhonua and Wela-ahi-lani, "at the time when the gods created the stars, they also created a multitude of angels, or spirits (i kini akua), who were not created like men, but made from the spittle of the gods (i kuhaia), to be their servants or messengers. These spirits, or a number of them, disobeyed and revolted, because they were denied the awa; which means that they were not permitted to be worshipped, awa being a sacrificial offering and sign of worship. These evil spirits did not prevail, however, but were conquered by Kane, and thrust down into uttermost darkness (ilalo loa i ka po). The chief of these spirits was called by some Kanaloa, by others Milu, the ruler of Po; Akua ino; Kupu ino, the evil spirit. Other legends, however, state that the veritable and primordial lord of the Hawaiian inferno was called Manua. The inferno itself bore a number of names, such as Po-pau-ole, Po-kua-kini, Po-kini-kini, Po-papa-ia-owa, Po-ia-milu. Milu, according to those other legends, was a chief of superior wickedness on earth who was thrust down into Po, but who was really both inferior and posterior to Manua. This inferno, this Po, with many names, one of which remarkably enough was Ke-po-lua-ahi, the pit of fire, was not an entirely dark place. There was light of some kind and there was fire. The legends further tell us that when Kane, Ku, and Lono were creating the first man from the earth, Kanaloa was present, and in imitation of Kane, attempted to make another man out of the earth. When his clay model was ready, he called to it to become alive, but no life came to it. Then Kanaloa became very angry, and said to Kane,

'I will take your man, and he shall die,' and so it happened. Hence the first man got his other name Kumu-uli, which means a fallen chief, he

[notHagoth7]

As a capstone to Tiro's proposed chain of custody, here's a map of Caesar's campaigns in Gaul/France. It may assist us in further discussion.