Thursday, 28 August 2014

Gods Who Were Men

Below is an introductory section from 'Gods Who Were Men' by Ruth Verrill, written and distributed by mimeograph in 1950. In this large work, which can be found in four sections and in entirety on our PDF site, 
Ruth Verrill examines a number of relics from the 'New World' which may link back to the 'Old World'. The editor acknowledges no knowledge of archaeology or Biblical studies, but cannot find anywhere any disproof of Ruth Verrill's critical researches.
This editor encourages useful comments and emails on Ruth Verrill's work. Note that it appears that only about two of these 'books' remained until our digital republishing. A copy of the book may be obtained here.
There are hundreds of images in the book. I will try and add a few in the future, The images do appear also in the PDF format of this work.
Gods Who Were Men
From copy 7 - Dr. Junius Bird, American Museum of Natural History
image 1
image 2
Being the Second Edition of  'When Gods Were Men'
By
Ruth Verrill
December 1950

Copies
                               I.      Instituto National de Antropologie e Historia, Mexico.
                            II.      Dr.Charles E. Elvers, Baltimore, Maryland.
                         III.      (my own copy)
                         IV.      Rabbi Clifton H. Levy, New York.
                            V.      Dr. Earnest Hooton, Dept. Anthropology, Harvard U.
                         VI.      Dr. Robert von Heine-Geldern, Vienna.
                      VII.      Dr. Junius Bird, American Museum of Natural History.
                   VIII.      Dr. Julius Tello, Peru.
                         IX.       

Introduction
The purpose of this book is primarily to identify the many deified personages of the ancient people of the Old World, to trace their genealogies, to give their various aliases, to describe their various attributes and their supposed powers and in as far as possible to explain their identifying symbols and the origins of these symbols.
The fact that the names and attributes of the man-gods were identical or very similar both in the Old World and in America centuries before the Christian era would indicate that the deities of the ancient pre-Incans, the Toltecs, Aztecs and Mayas and the deities of the ancient Old World people had a common origin and that there was direct and frequent contact between the inhabitants of the two hemispheres.
The question of whether or not the early American cultures were introduced by colonizers from Asia and the Near East is a most controversial matter. On the other hand we have a number of scientists who declare positively that all the pre-Columbian races in America were descendants of migrants who crossed from Asia via the Behring Straits and who insist that all ancient American cultures were wholly of American origin and that there was not and never had been any contact with the Old World prior to the Spanish Conquest.
Who are or were the "pure-blooded American Indians"? If there were no indigenous human beings in America prior to the migration from northeastern Asia, then the "pure-blooded American Indians" were really pure-blooded Asiatics. If this is the case, and they did come to America in prehistoric times when they were in a lower cultural state, why could not those who yet remained in Asia have followed them as readily as had the earlier people and why could they not have done so with increased ease as their cultural knowledge advanced? Is it reasonable to believe that a migration of culturally undeveloped people could have negotiated the passage to America and this became impossible for better equipped and more developed descendants in later times?
Certain scientists maintain that only a few centuries had elapsed between the time of the beginnings of these cultures and the arrival of the Europeans. But they fail to explain how it was possible for nomadic primitive Asiatics to have spread and increased until they occupied the entire Western Hemisphere from the Arctic to Tierra del Fuego and from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and to have developed totally distinct languages, characteristics, arts and religions all in the space of time allotted to them. Neither do they explain how, in far less time than would be required today, these people evolved highly complex and advanced civilizations, erected thousands of magnificent temples and other structures—and all by most primitive methods and with stone tools only. But these scientists go even further in their all American ardor. When a Mayan date glyph is deciphered that puts the period of its carving back farther than the scientists consider permissible, they boldly announce that the ancient Mayan sculptor made a mistake of several centuries when varying the glyphs.
Can anyone with a modicum of common sense imagine anything of this sort? Even if the actual artisan made such an error it would at once have been noticed by the priests and would have been corrected. But no, our hard-headed "pure American" archaeologists set themselves up as knowing more about Mayan dates and glyphs than did the Mayas themselves, yet, as a matter of fact, no one can be absolutely certain of the correlation of Mayan dates with our own, and as far as I know, no two scientists agree on this matter.
As an example of the extreme lengths to which a certain school of our scientists have gone in order to hoodwink the public and maintain their claims, they have insisted that the pre-Columbian Americans did not know the wheel. But wheeled toys and carts had been found in Mexico (1887, 1940) and all of these scientists were well aware of the fact.
The Associate Curator of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, New York City, in his splendid article "IS AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURE ASIATIC?" is as far as I know, the first to mention the wheeled toys in an official publication produced by a museum or other scientific foundation and we both hope this will dispel the wide spread fallacy that the pre-Columbian American aborigine had no knowledge of the wheel.
There is a strong and increasing reactionary group who now admit that all indications point to ancient contacts between the Old World and America many centuries before the Christian era, some even admitting that there are abundant proof that many of the arts, the beliefs, the mathematics, the religions and the deities were brought to America from Asia and were developed into the civilizations of Peru, Mexico and Yucatan, and scarcely a month goes by that some new discovery linking the American with the Old World cultures is not made.
The material presented in this book merely points out by means of incontrovertible proofs long established by history, inscriptions, and sculptures supported by traditions that many, if not most of the Old World god-men had their exact counterparts at the same period in America. So frequently does this occur that it cannot by any stretch of the imagination be relegated to the realm of coincidence.
A coincidence might occur once in a great while but coincidences do not and cannot occur over and over again not only in a name but in symbols, attributes, lineage and other details.
Finally quite apart from any light my work may shed upon the question of the Old World origin of early America’s higher civilizations, I feel that the material I have compiled is of both scientific and popular interest, especially as nothing of the sort has ever been previously attempted. The material holds a great deal of real human interest pointing out, as it does, how important a part symbolism has played in the deification of personages in the dim and obscure past and the origins of these symbols.

Ruth Verrill,
Route 1, Chiefland, FL

Chapter


When Gods Were Men
This manuscript is being written with the idea of preserving the findings I have made during my fifteen years’ research into dim and most obscure backgrounds of the higher cultures of the Early Americas. That any shred of knowledge is to be found at all is most amazing. It is a subject that cannot be found in any libraries’ reference rooms for there is no work covering the subject. Source material has to be culled from many, many sources; works written by many scientists and historians, etymologists and theologists, curators of museums and others.
Material selected for this work has been culled from the works of reputable persons and most of the data has appeared in various publications. This compilation is my own original effort. My only collaborator was my husband. He helped me with the South American material and made many helpful suggestions. The endeavor has been most tedious but thoroughly enjoyable.
Those who have seen the work we are doing, as well as that which has been completed say we have more than proved our contention that the higher cultures of the Americas were introduced by the Sumerians, Phoenicians, Goths, Aryans or Asiatics, depending on the name preferred. I use the coined name "Sumerian" throughout this compilation or monograph, though I am aware of the fact that it was originally a geographical term. It is merely a matter of convenience.
I do not contend that this race carried out vast projects of colonization or that they came from one area or even any particular era. They seem to have originally occupied Pachacamac, Peru in very remote times, though I doubt if they originated in that area.
The god-king Pachacamac and his wife left Peru, according to tradition but seem to have left a handful of their race to carry on the government, religion and commerce. The founder of the Phoenician dynasty, king Nuna or Haryashwa or his sons, probably came to one or both of the Americas and his descendant, Tizama, seems to have been the god-king and culture bringer Itzama, of the Early Mayan race. Sargon of Agade or King Sagara and his son, and grandson are most certainly on the list of arrivals and the remarkable prime minister and arch-priest, An-Nannatu, of the last dynasty of Ur, who held office under several kings of Ur, the last being King Ibil-Sin. There will be more about these personages later.
There are those who believe that this remarkable race had its origin on some lost continent or island that sank and left but a remnant of their race and culture intact. Some are positive that the race originated in the table-lands of Eastern Asia, but it would not surprise me if some one finds proof of their having originated in America.
After considerable cogitation I have decided to begin the first chapter with the most ancient cultures of the Central Andean regions, particularly those discovered in the Department of Ancash, Peru. Though these findings and comparisons have been lauded by curators of two institutions whose professions are archaeology and ethnology, several scientists and a few serious students of ancient history, one principal of a school, several teachers, one newspaper man and an editor of a University press among others, there are those who think my efforts quite a waste of time and energy and all I have achieved, according to the views of this group, is a rather unusual compilation of nothing more than mere coincidences. If you, as a reader of this work, feel as the latter group say they do, please, just to disprove our contentions, read this compilation of monographs through and prove we are in error. We are quite willing to have you try.

Chapter 1  Haihayas of Asia and the Huailas or Huaylas of Peru

Chapter 2  Sumerian in our South Western United States?

Chapter 3   Round Towers

Chapter 4  Sea Shells in Ceremony and Religions

Chapter 5  Who were the Toltecs?

Chapter 6  Gorget of Naram-Sin (Narmer) in New Mexico

Chapter 7  Naram-Sin's Portrait Carved in Stone Found in Lake Texcoco, Mexico

Chapter 8  Gods of Early Mexico

Chapter 9  Indar and Engur

Chapter 10  Amenti and Amencay

Chapter 11  Yahuah and Associated Deities of South America

Chapter 12  Summary of Personages Connected with Cultural Development of the Americas

Chapter 13  Trees of Life and Tonalamatls

Chapter 14  Wheels? What Wheels??

Chapter 15  Genesis and the Four Bacabs

Chapter 16  How were the Old Empire Mayas Related to the Mochicas of Peru?

Chapter 17  Maize as Depicted in Ancient Art

Appendix - Fusang 

Chapter 1  Haihayas of Asia and the Huailas or Huaylas of Peru

It is our belief, substantiated by history, tradition and other evidence, that the progenitors of the Huailas of Peru were the ancient Haihayes of the vicinity of the City of Umma, in an area then known as Southern Babylonia. In the following pages we offer some of the evidences that have led us to this belief.
First, however, in order to explain who the Haihayas were, a brief outline of their history is essential.
The priest-king Lugel-Aggisi or Zaggisi, a son of Ukush, (both Haihaya chieftains) was the ruler of the City of Umma at the time he began the conquest of his kinsman, Sargon of Agade or King Sagara, as he should be called. In one of the inscriptions King Aggisi had made is the following: "...(I have)...conquered the land from the Rising of the Sun to its Setting, and made straight the path from the Lower Sea (Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean) over the Euphrates and Tigris into the Upper Sea (Mediterranean)." After his successful war of conquest he had his capital at the city of Erech.
King Uruka Gina died shortly after losing his realm and one of his wives was about to throw herself upon his funeral pyre when the great and very noble prophet and priest Aurva begged her to not do so for she was to be the mother of a mighty emperor and to commit self immolation was unthinkable for she must preserve the life of her unborn prince.
Priest Aurva being of the same race as King Uruka Gina and a very learned man and an excellent teacher, took upon himself the task of teaching the young prince when of suitable age. The priest taught him religious and civil law, execution of ceremonials and literature and various sciences, including that of planned warfare.
When Prince Sagara or Guni came of age he waged a terrible crushing defeat over his Haihaya kinsmen, King Lugal Aggisi, and would have wiped him and his tribe off the face of the earth along with several other tribes who had acted in the revolt against his father, but for the plea made by the prince's family priest.
This would seem to be so, for many years later another king had trouble with the Haihayas whom it would seem, were predestined to attract trouble. About 2300 B.C., Haihaya princes, sons of King Arjuna Kartevirya, killed King Jama-Dagni in a personal feud. This king was succeeded by his son, Purash-Sin, or Bur-Sin 1, who was also known as Parashu-Ram, the traditional founder of the hereditary Brahman caste system, which is still the most outstanding feature of East Indian sociology.
King Parashu-Ram in his wrath over the murder of his father waged a war of extermination against the Haihaya princes and Sun-cultists and even had his mother put to death as she also served as a devotee of the Sun-cult. (She was a granddaughter of the priest-king of Lagash, pateai Cudea.)            See next page—
In the area we now know as Palestine are remains of two archaic town-sites, Aija and Haiyan that perhaps existed prior to the reign of King Sagara but I must explain this later.
image 3- The Gudea of the old World and the New—Compare these two.
A full figure statue carved in stone representing Gudea, the priest-king of the port city of Lagash is shown above at the left. He lived about 2373-2368 B.C.
The carved head at the right is tilted backward somewhat, causing the features to appear longer than they actually are. Notice the identical carving of the eyes, indication of the headdress being a wound or wrapped turban and traces of it once having been ornamental like that worn by Gudea, showing just above the space between the brows. This head was discovered by Dr. Matthew Stirling in Mexico in 1940. (From "National Geographic Magazine")
The likeness is most amazing and it is doubtful if it is just a coincidence.

A little earlier then the reign of King Sagara, King Shubad’s (King of Ur) son, Tizama was reigning in India, according to Pali records. The latter also bore the following names (among others), Somaka, Sambhuta, and Tez-car. Tizama’s worship seems to have been much like that followed by the Haihayas but just what his relationship to the Haihayas may have been is not stated but the following theory based on historical facts may offer a reasonable supposition:
If Tizama and his father, Shubad are synonymous with the two supreme deities of the Mayas, Hunab-ku and his son Itzama it is not at all improbable that the Haihayas, also called Huhunuri, were Itzama's or Tizama's people (compare Huhunuri with the name Junin). (J in this case has the sound of H.)
It is not impossible that King Lugal Aggisi sent to India for Tizama, at the time of his conquest of Sagara’s father and asked Tizama to return to Babylon or Lagash or Erech and prepare to take charge of the newly acquired West Lands. This supposition would account for the indications that people from the land we now know as Palestine, emigrated to South America and became established there, for King Tizama, if we continue with this supposition—would have undoubtedly gone to Phoenicia and employed a fleet of ships, crew, artisans, priests and at least a few troops. If this is the case, it would explain why Tizama, if we follow the belief that he was the same personage as Itzama, never seems to have returned to his native land . He was quite well along in age at this time and after Sagara's conquest of the Haihayas, and his land remained under the rule of his enemy, or his peoples' enemy, King Sagara, there would have been no opportunity for him to have returned before his demise.
However, there seems to have been a very close connection between the Hualias of Peru and the Haihayas of the Arabian peninsula.
Now to resume the subject pertaining to Aija and Haiyan in Palestine. Both of these archaeological sites are of an archaic type and are not very far apart. Aija, Ai or Aiath as it is variously called, is east of Bethel and near Bethaven and north of Mishmash. Biblical Joshua unsuccessfully attacked Aija but the city was later taken by strategy. Due to various vicissitudes the town never recovered its former prestige and very little remains of its earlier culture today.
. . .
In the Department of Ancash, Peru, in South America are very archaic remains. These are described by Dr. Julio Tello in his article "Andean Civilization: Some Problems of Peruvian Archaeology" , printed in the "XXIII International Congress of Americanists", held 1928.
The cultures are arranged in the following manner: Callejon de Huaylas, Chavin, Chongoyape and Paracas with cultural influence extending from the coast to the Central Andean region. Dr.Tello states that the archaic, megalithic cultural type seems to extend from San Augustine in Columbia to Tiahuanaco, Bolivia and there appears to have been a widespread influence in historically remote times.
In the Department of Ancash, Peru are several village sites bearing Old World names, one spelled exactly the same, two spelled almost the same and several others that are recognizably similar. The Peruvian town of Aija has its name in counterpart, the town in Palestine called Aija , previously mentioned and when interpreted meant almost the same thing, 'ruined' or 'destroyed'. The little town of Recuey in the Department of Ancash has its Bible Land counterpart in Recah, a place occupied by a tribe of Judah, which undoubtedly was in the vicinity of Aija in Palestine, Other towns in the Department of Ancash bearing a closely similar name to the archaic town-site of Haiyan of the Bible, are Huascan, Hualcan, Huaylas and Huarmay,
In the neighboring Department of Junin is a town called Caina; another town with a Biblical namesake, Cana or "Place of the Reeds". (see later) Also, in this same Department is the town of Tarmar, a name closely resembling Tamyras,.the name of a river between Sidon and Beirut, in Phoenicia, also between Hebron and Elath, is a town called Tamara.
A town in the Department of Ancash named Huari, has a Biblical counterpart in the name of a man, Huari, interpreted as "Linen weaver". This may be of sufficient importance to warrant several quotations from a Quechua Dictionary that the reader may see some of the words in that language pertaining to weaving. "A weaver" in the Cuzco, Peru Dialect (one of those forming the (Quechua language) is AHUAY-Camayok. In the Ayacucho Dialect it is AKUAC (See page 57,65) (compare with A-NAHUA-AC of the Aztecs) and in the Junin it is AHUA. In the Junin Dialect a 'weaver' of stockings is Medias (a Spanish word) HAHUA, in Ancash; "—shuag." In the Cuzco Dialect a weaver of ponchos is called AHUAK. "To weave—" in the Cuzco, Ayacucho, Junin and Ancash Dialects is AHUAY. Compare this word with Huari, mentioned above, and the town of Ancash with the name of Huari.
The naming of places in a new land after those in the old is a well known trait and from the evidence given here it would seem that there was no exception to this trait among these people in Peru.
In and near the Department of Ancash are archaeological remains showing highly distinctive depictions of religious and ceremonial matters along with carvings of men and women of such an obviously superior type that they must have been carved to represent actual personages.
Various features of these ancient works of art furnish clues to the identity of these people and their origin and also serve in tracing their apparent migrations through several centuries and quite a few countries.
Another, and very important matter pertaining to this subject is that of the worship of Indar (a son or grandson of the East Indian Lawgiver, Manu) deified as Mishi, Ishi, Tas, Tashia etc. Some claim this deified personage was Indar himself, others claim him to have been a son of Indar). The Haihayas or Hunuhuris worshipped this deified personage, Indar, as he seems to have been one of their ancient progenitors. The pre-Incas, worshipped him as Enki (similar to Ea, the Semetic name for deified In-Dur (Indar) and as the “Cat-god" Mishi. Ishi of the Bible was but another name for Jehovah and superseded the synonymous name, Baali, "My Master". Ishi has at least two interpretations, "My Husband" and "Saving".
The various stone carvings representing the "Cat-god" Mishi, found in the Department of Ancash, Peru are still to be seen and I include several depictions of this deity with his felines from several parts of the Old World and for comparison, include several from Ancash.
(image 4) Huarmay, Department of Ancash, Peru.
(image 5) Phrygia's "Tasia" or "Mishi".
(image 6)
This scene is from a carved ivory handle of a stone knife ,found in Egypt, and of predynastic age, now in the Louvre. (See L.Benedite "MONS. ACADEME des INSCRIPTS" XII.l.) "Tasia" or "Mishi" etc., of very early era.
(image 7) From Marka-Kunka, Aija, Huaraz, Department of Ancash.
(image 8)
A pre-Christian depiction of Tasia, from a cross at Hamilton, Strath-Clyde, Scotland.
(image 9) Old World
(image 10 page)
I have other depictions of this "Cat-god" from the Old World and from the New, but this may suffice, and carry sufficient weight to indicate the probability of his having been transplanted from the Old World to the New. If this evidence is accepted, it will put this particular Asiatic immigration into South America in pre-historic times.
A seemingly irrelevant subject leads to additional substantiation of this subject. It is the horse-shoe-like symbol known as the "earth bowl". This object is found archaeologically in many forms and in a fairly large number of places, including areas inhabited by the Mayas, Aztecs and their kindred tribes. The origin of the "earth bowl" symbol must be explained in order that a clear idea of its relationship to the present subject may be understood. Several races, including the Chaldeans, Chino-Turks, Hindoos and Early Aryans had a tradition that their people came from an area known to us as the Tarim Basin, a locality north of Tibet.
This land is so formed geographically, that it roughly resembles a huge ’bowl’ or basin. The race with whom this symbol originated preserved the memory of its form and it is known to us in several forms. One is the so-called 'yoke’ found archaeologically in areas influenced by the early higher cultures of Mexico and farther south. These 'bowls’ may be seen on stela, in codices and in other forms of art. The people who retained the symbol undoubtedly knew its meaning as well. For the benefit of the reader a few depictions of these 'bowls' are submitted. (See page 12)
The carved stone statue of a personage at Rurek, Aija and the other from Aija Huaraz, shows these earth-bowls in inverted position, perhaps to indicate that the race no longer inhabited the locality. The first mentioned carries a shield or plaque on which is depicted
1-            "Earth Bowl" from headdress of figure from Aija, Peru. (See photograph given below.)
2-            A so-called ’yoke' from Vera Cruz, Mexico. A highly conventionalized "Earth Bowl"
3-            An Aztecan "Earth Bowl".
4-            An Aztecan "Earth Bowl" as a water symbol.
5-            The Mayan symbol, EK-AHAU, an "Earth Bowl".
6-            Conventionalized "Earth Bowls" on a Toltec pillar from Tula
7-            Mexican "Earth Bowl".
8-            "Earth Bowl" from the figure's costume on a stela at Cerra De Mesa , Mexic. (very ancient.)
9-            An ancient representation of the “Earth Bowl" formed by the Tarim Basin. (From Maspero, See photo below.)
image 11
image 12

No comments:

Blog Archive

Countries we have visited

About Me

My photo

As an armed forces brat, we lived in Rockcliff (Ottawa), Namao (Edmonton), Southport (Portage La Prairie), Manitoba, and Dad retired to St. Margaret's Bay, NS.
Working with the Federal Govenment for 25 years, Canadian Hydrographic Service, mostly. Now married to Gail Kelly, with two grown children, Luke and Denyse. Retired to my woodlot at Stillwater Lake, NS, on the rainy days I study the life and work of A. Hyatt Verrill 1871-1954.