Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/26/83; site ihuxk.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!gummo!whuxlb!pyuxll!eisx!npoiv!npois!hogpc!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxk!jdj55611
From: jdj55611@ihuxk.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Native American Origins
Message-ID: <465@ihuxk.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Sep-83 19:32:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxk.465
Posted: Mon Sep 19 19:32:50 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Sep-83 15:44:13 EDT
Organization: BTL Naperville, Il.
Lines: 106


Boy, do I have a problem with a few things that Tom Harris said in
reference to the origins of the American Indians. After briefly describing
the Bering Strait theory, he produced the following:

	>From this point on there is no hard cultural evidence of any mass 
	migration to the New World until the palefaces show up plague the
	Amerinds and take over.

Who said anything about a mass migration? The principle migration discussed
in the Book of Mormon was that of Lehi and family; one boat and less than
twenty people. 

Harris then continues:

                                      ... there is no evidence of any
	deliberate organized crossing (until the Vikings who are driven off by
	the locals rather quickly) and no evidence of any large outside (the New
	World) influence on the Amerind cultures (until Columbus).

Let me mention a few:

(1) Domesticated cotton grown in areas of Peru and Mexico is a hybrid of
the Old World domesticate and the wild cotton found in the Americas.
Attempts to explain how this cross-fertilization could have naturally
occurred have not met with results. The domestic banana grown in South America
does not have any wild relatives on the continent, yet banana leaves
of an Old World variety were found in a tomb in Peru .

(2) The looms used by the Peruvian Indians at the time of the conquest are
similar to those found in an Egyptian tomb. In fact, both used the same
eleven moving parts.

(3) Pointed toed shoes appear in several stone carvings in Central America.
The only other historical occurrences of such are among the Hittites
(Canaanites) and Etruscians.

(4) The method of mummification used by the pre-Columbians in Peru is
similar to that of Egypt. Mummified animals have been found in Peru which
is consistent with Egyptian practice.

(5) The method of quarrying stone in South America is identical to that of
the Old World. Masonry methods in South and Central America also have their
counterparts in the Old World.

(6) Thor Heyerdahl's boat, RA2, built by South American Indians of the
Lake Titicaca area more closely resembled the Egyptian prototype than that
built by contemporary Egyptians for his first expedition.

(7) A stela found in Campeche, Mexico show a man wearing a reed-boat hat
and wearing an earplug with the Star of David.

(8) An expediton from the Smithsonian, working on an unrifled grave in
eastern Tennessee, uncovered a stone with an inscription. The Bat Creek
inscription is in the Hebrew language and Old Hebrew Script of about 100
A.D. The text read `for Judea' or `for the Judea[ns]'

This is, by no means, a complete list of the interesting similarities found
between Old World and New World.  I do admit that items 1-7 are
considered `soft' evidence; they provide provocative food for thought.
Item 8 is hard evidence of pre-Columbian contact across the Atlantic.

Harris continues:
                                                        ...since no one
   denys that the Indians of North America and South America are descended from
   the same peoples, yet their blood types show marked differences (i.e.
   Jensen has shown within his article a contradiction to his own theory).

First of all, I don't seem to remember proposing any theory which would
contradict the information I gave. My closing comment was a statement to
the effect that the origin of the native American populations may have been
from a variety of sources which would easily explain the differences in
blood type. 

The question arises: Do pre-Columbian  artifacts indicate the presence
of a single ethnic race in the Americas?

"To judge from their art, the Olmecs comprised two contrasting ethnic
types: One was remarkably Negroid, with thick lips, flat broad nose, and a
round face... The other Olmec type is strikingly different, sometimes
representing an almost Semitic type, with narrow face, sharp profile,
strongly hooked nose, thin lips, and a beard that can vary from a small
goatee to a full beard... Since neither of the two contrasting Olmec
types - the Negroid and the Semitic - bears the slightest resemblance to
any ethnic group known to have existed in aboriginal America, whereas both
represent physical types characteristic  of the ancient civilizations of
the Old World, their sudden appearance as culture-bringers in the New
World, just in the area where the natural ocean conveyer arrives from
Africa, has led to a flurry of speculation..."

				Thor Heyerdahl in
				`The Quest for America'

(The Olmecs are thought to be the precursers to the Mayan and Aztec
civilizations.)

Two of many books which discuss this topic are `Fair Gods and Stone Faces' by
Constance Irwin and `Riddles in History' by Cyrus H. Gordon in addition to
the one cited above.

I feel it is safe to say the the jury is still out on the origins of the
original Americans.

			J. D. Jensen
			ihuxk!jdj55611
			BTL Naperville IL