JXF TO CRAIG WHITE
I think that we have done well however to include the Neanderthal/Cromagnon
in the imediate post flood rapid ice age and as a decendent of Adam and Noah
suffering with Rickets . and indeed Dr Jack Cuozzo is an expert on Neanderthal
who has written the book on Neanderthal "Burried Alive". However
what I'd like to ask you at the present moment is "When do you think that
stonehenge was built. There was a migration of Indoeuropeans to Ireland and
Britain in 2520 annomundi and 1484 BC accompanied at the same time by the
formorians (Mesolithic industry) as their typicle imliments and weopens from
Tory Island will testify and there is a possibility that they may
have been the last neanderthals in Britain and for that matter Ireland.; It
seems to me that Brutus is not mentioned in present British Israel
litrature but always used to be and was assigned to him ie Brutus at 2900
annomundi and 1104 BC for the early Bronze industry in Britain and 1145
BC in Ireland under Nemed. So Why have http://www.consciousevolution.com/Rennes/arthurchapter7.htm
said that the Bronze age did'nt start untill 800 BC when the Phoenicians
opened up the trade routs. I have exercised caution on the date of 1484 BC and
this industry was chalcolithic and neolithic at the same time contemporary
with the fomorians who reached Ireand and Britain at the same time. John
JXF
John Hext-Fremlin <johnhextfremlin@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Dan I have some interesting inf for you on "Levitaion " from a book
I have
by Denis Peterson "Unlocking the Mysteries of Creation" and There's
an
amazing report from Tibet. "In a recent book from Playfair and Hill; A
Sweedish aircraft engineer named HenryKjellson wittnessed an awsome
ceremoney conducted by Tibeten priests at the bas of a sheer rock cliff in
the mountains; scores of men had gathered together to take their parts in
the dramatic scene. Groups of them were carefully arranged in a semi circle
equippedwith large suspended drums and others with speciall trumpets (as it
the case with the walls of Jerico and Joshua for example). As the ceremoney
proceeded the drum beats and trumpet blasts were directed at the centre of
the semi circle in front of the Cliff . A four foot block of rock was
positioned there. The corporate noise of the assembled instruments must have
been very deafening; but after a whilethe heavy chunk of rock weighing
several tons was seen ascending the cliff" in the air straight up to the
top
of the cliff" which is unexplanable by natural laws . But notice a report
from the popular "Omni " Magazine in november 1980. According to
this Nassa
scientists have succeeded in using sound waves to levitate glass pellets or
metal. Could ther be realms of technology which we have to yet
"rediscover"? In Solomon's words: "There is no rememberence of
former things
and there's nothing new underthe sun. It has already been in ancient times
before us." so it seems given this sought of technology that stone henge
or
the stones "thereof" could have been moved by exactly this method or
perhaps
by giants. Sorry about getting behind with my emails ownly I had to study
those other papers that you sent me especially the one on the formorians
that was most facinating and it does indeed seem to prove Charles Kimball
correct about the formores being more correctly Neanderthal "Hibrids".
As
for the other guy I don't know what he means when he sugests that some
neanderthals were "sterile". This is nonsense on his part and I
don't aggree
with his unacceptable time line of 60,000 to 500,000 years ago. As for being
stuck on Ussher's time line I would aggree to keepimg an open mind and
looking at what other people are saying about the age of the world but at
the same time as I've said before and with the greatest respect Dan is as
Bill Cooper says to quote him: He said to me : "Let that; The Biblical
chronology set the standard by which all other chronologies are set
(Ussher's chronology) and let the bible be firm and "Every human
speculation
a "Jelley" ". and these Dan are the exact words he said to me.
I cannot
stress enough the danger of going down a slippery slope and using an
"extended chronology or adding to Ussher's because once we go down that
road
we would keep on wanting to alter the chronology because it might be "out
of
date". That to me is an absurd way of looking at it. I am quite happy to
look at what other people might be saying about the age of the earth; but if
you go back before 4004 BC this leads to gaps and could severely undermine
the dates for Abraham. So as I say if one date is wrong then all of them are
and that is why I will with the greatest respect compromise with Ussher's
chronology and that for me is the standard and anchor by which all other
chronologies are set. Mike Gascoigne for example claims to uphold Ussher's
chronology but in his table he gives 3963 BC as the date of creation and he
is well out on the date for Partholan whom he dates at 1969 annomundi and
2035 BC which is vastly different to Bill Cooper who puts it at 1484 BC and
this is a gap of over 500 years so where does Mike Gascoigne get his date of
2035 BC from in the 21st year after Abraham. Ussher's annals and Genesis
place Abraham at 2008 am and 1996 BC. I'll send the one on the formores to
Mike Fischer and it is interesting that this paper said they were on Tory
Island just exactly as I predicted as I know this will interest him. One
thing I would ask you Dan : Do you have my stone artifact photo I sent to
you as an attachment? John
DJ
I have read a number of different accounts of this (Tibet) levitation feat
and I have Dennis Petersen's book. I have talked to him a number of
times
on the phone. I like Dennis. He is not afraid to challenge the
traditional
paradigm. I am aware of all of this, Omni, Solomon's words, Tibet and
much
more such as antigravity, vortex technology, classified military technology,
electromagnetic/static/gravity technology, etc. Keep digging... and we
may
see a common thread.
Formorians or Formores--I don't see the connection to Neanderthals. Why
is
there a connection? What evidence?
I do not think giants moved the stones.
Arch Bishop Usher his time line is just one of many which attempt to use the
scriptures to set up a time line. The real slippery slope is sticking to
one person's verson (or deifying Arch Bishop Usher) to the exclusion of
others who have also attempted to create chronologies as well using the
scriptures. If, "Arch"y is wrong and we are excluding all the
other time
lines then we lost ground on trying to move closer to the truth. Right?
That is why I sent you the Wikipedia list of possible chronologies. You
have to convince me that Archies is the best (for that matter they are
probably all wrong). Many creation scientists have recently come up with
alternative Chronologies that they believe are more accurate than Archies.
I think you should examine them all and look at their arguments and then
come to a conclusion and even then still keep an open mind. Archie is
not a
Holy Grail that is to be deified. He is just a person, who is prone to
make
mistakes.
I thought I sent you a reply email concerning the artifact photo. It
looks
old, as if its original shape has been altered by years of chemical/physical
erosion of its original shape. I do not have the expertise to tell you
if
it is a net weight or a arrow straightener. The Native Americans had a
notched out flat rock that they slide the arrow shaft back and forth over to
straighten it. I think it is less likely to be an arrow shaft
straightener
because there is so little depth to it. That is just an opinion
MORE ON LEVITATION
DJ TO JXF
Oh-don't get me started on UFOs. I have been researching the subject
for
years and I even have a PowerPoint presentation on the subject.
You would not believe what I found out. Has nothing at all to do with
aliens. When people see a UFO (like myself-personal experience and many
others I have talked to) they are usually seeing top secret technology
developed within our own corporate structure such as Lockheed & other
aeronotics defense contractors. Tesla provided the early development of
the
technology. The Germans developed jet powered circular aircraft and
probably even a field propulsion vehicle. The field propulsion vehicles
are
used for spying and top secret missions. If one crashes we are the first
to
get to the sight and secure it. Other countries have them as well.
They
can go 20,000 miles per hr. and totally reverse directions 180 degrees
because they are electromagnetic/static/gravitic. The occupants do not
feel
G forces to this extreme because they are moving in an artificially created
field which negates the G force effect.
Abductions are in the mind the majority of the time. They usually occur
to
those who have dabbled in some form of the occult or New Age movement.
Demons and disinformation agents of variious governments try to convince us
that aliens exist.
JXF to DJ
Good to hear from you Dan; and I understand the position workwise. I
have some
information for you on Merlin. I got the book in Waterstones in Stafford and
apparently Merlin had supernatural powers; because he did'nt have an
earthly father so there's one reason he might have been able to move the
stones at stone henge. As regards email addresses I think it would be safer
for now to stay with my hotmail account. John
DJ to JXF
Do you know that I have found several references to the Yavana (ancient
Greeks) having the technology for flight (powered vehicle). Isn't that
interesting. Let me know if you find more on this subject.
John Hext-Fremlin wrote:
Dan was the email I sent you yesterday helpful on the subject of
levitation. I am getting Renne Norbergen's book out of the library today
although I might have to order it out of the county and it will probably
be
a little while before I get it. I haven't herd from you for a couple of days
so I hope evrything is ok. John
DJ to JXF - Mercury Propulsion: IFOs not UFOs
This is copied out of a prior email conversation with someone who knows a
whole lot more than I do. You will find this very interesting to say the
least!
I am getting back to you on the Mercury propulsion. Here is some
correspondance I have had recently. I am trying to get people with
similar
interests linked to continue the work. I hope we can all keep working on
getting some technology working.
One of the things that really surprises me is that in spite of the fact that
I belong to several yahoo groups I find very few that are interested in the
subject of mercury propulsion. There is evidence that the Nazis were
spinning some type of molten mercury material and getting effects similar to
that of those exposed to UFOs. Radiation poisoning, lack of clorophyl in
plants in areas where they have landed, destruction of cellular walls of
meat and plants (plants turn in to molassas type compounds and meat loses
its structure)--"Hunt for Zero Point". Nick Cook's discussion
of the
subject left me wondering if they were intentionally adding radioactive
materials or if the materials and were able to siphon off the energy when
they put them into a spin or if they became radioactive as a result of the
high speed spin. They did all the experimenting deep in a mine and
killed
all 65 people who worked with the project so that the technology would not
fall into the wrong hands.
Spun metals must account for at least part of the propulsion systems used on
UFOs which are actually IFOs to top Air Force officials who are responsible
for keeping the technology secret. Your path to understanding this
technology should not be hampered by belief in aliens. This technology
has
nothing to do with aliens, extraterrestrials do not exist. It has its
origins in Tesla and Nazi Germany not alien spaceships.
Races did not originate from Babel. Races were obviously starting to
differentiate within the first several hundred years after creation. The
wives of the sons of Noah and Noah's wife could have had racial features and
those features began to accentuate rapidly when the people began to
disperse. However, I would expect that some racial features were present
before and very soon after the Babel event.
We know the Chinese had rockets. The East Indians, Greeks, Babylonians,
Chinese, & Mongolians had flying machines such as vimanas. It is my
belief
that soon after the flood in many areas technology reached it zenith and
continued on a downward decline until the time of the reformation.
You need to read the Epic of Gilgamesh if you want to get an idea of what
the early people were like. This epic refers back to a time when Noah
was
still alive (within 500 years of the Flood).
JXF to DJ
Great stuff Dan; I'll look forward to hearing from you. By the way I have
some interesting info from Renne. He says that there were rockets in
antideluvian times and he also mentions prebabel ancient civilization
centres and Dr Chitic in his book "The puzzle of Ancient Man" says
there was
a prebabel high civilization before the tower of Babel. It looks to me if
I'm correct in saying this: "That I think we'll have to abandon the
ideathat there were early prebabel neanderthals in Europe and take them fom
the time of Babel onwards. I also have a links page from Gunnar Heinsohn
that refutes the idea of long ages for the human race although I know 2247
BC would imply an antiquity but as you know and as you've already seen Dan
Larry's understanding of the ideas of races originates at Babel. I have this
interesting links page with me and it dates neanderthals from 3500 years ago
which we'll have to go along with. It also falls into line with my table for
Britain and Ireland although I think in some places Gunnar is trying "to
tread water into the deep mist of time" given the flood date 2348 BC. I
would also refute Gunnar Heinsohn's evolutionary bias as far as Partholan in
Ireland &c are concerned of a "chest of draws sequence of
cultures" but any
way here it is: http://hanskrause.de/HKHPE/hkhpe_14_05.htm
; John.
There are excavations currently under way at Stonehenge. It might be worth seeing what's been found so far.....
Hi Bill; Yes that would be of the utmost interest to see what has been found just recently at Stonehenge. Darrell informs me that there were Monoliths put up by the survey teams which I would conjecture at this point were erected by Sidon's team who were of course Phonicians and they of course kept their knowledge of smelting metals a closely guarded secret from the tribes who had lost technology particularly after Babel. It's interesting speculating on Hu G's men who arrived in Southern England around 1421 BC when "Mead and Honey production" was around at this time after the ice age melt down in 1491 BC .However as I was saying about drawing up a new industries chart I don't think there's any real need for it as I've gone into it in the text of my History paper which I have reconstructed with Darrell's help. I'll tell what I'd like to do Bill and that is to surf the web and see what has been found so far at stonehenge and will let you know what I find Meanwhile got to keep at it; Cheers for Now bill John
Thank
you, John. Fascinating stuff.
Bill.
Dear Bill I have just "surfed the web" on the new stonehenge finds you informed me about. Apparrently excavations by archaeologists at Durrington Walls (Neolithic Cultures of the British Isles by Stuart Piggot) have sugested that the find of living quarters or houses comprise the largest "Neolithic" Village found in Britain. They date it between 2600 and 2500 BC (Treading water). I reckon a creationary Ussherian chronology would probably date it to about 1750 BC. What do you reckon Bill? John
JXF to DF
"The Stonehenge Enigma"
Hi Darrell and a very Merry Christmas to you. I won't send any more
duplicate messages in compliance with your request as I now fully realize you
have much to catch up with. I have been looking again at Graham Fisher's
article on the "Stonehenge Enigma" and after having read it came to
the conclusion that it could not possibly date from the immediate Post Flood
Pre-Babel time ; because as Graham says: "There was a "Cave
Man" "Stone
age "" culture in this part of Britain (Southern England) that we
would call the Palaeolithic industry at this tim,e although in Orkney this
Neolithic industry was already in existance at the time of the founding of
Egypt c a 2189/2188 BC (Skara Brae) by Cichol Gricenchos and his men after
having started his fishing huntergatherer (Palaeolithic) industry in 2225 BC
200 before Battle of Magithe. Thus addopting Neolithic Culture in 2189 some
189 plus years before it was reintroduced by Nimrod worldwide 2100/2090 BC,
However from what i can make out is the fact that although jn England and as
you say Worldwide. It therfore seems more likely that Neolthic culture did not
reach this part of Britain untill the time of Abraham as you correctly
say the Celts and Druids and would thus aggree that this is the best possible
fit Historricly speaking in conclusion to my re-examination of the facts.
Stuart Piggott's Book "Neolithic Cultures of The British Isles" (And
I highly recomend this book to you Darrell as "Must Read")
correrlates remarkably well for his chronological table for this particular
part of Britain which he dates (ownly 4 years off) as being 2000 BC to 1500
BC. In other words the time of Abraham 1996 BC for the Druids and Celts
reaching this part of England. Thus if Albion had Neanderthals in his team
then they would belong to the period I sugest that I would still refur to as
"Palaeolithic" but what might be termed the Eppi-Palaeolithic as
some of the "Pigmy flint" tools of this period testify"
(2088-2044 BC) making the term "Mesolithic" an evolutionary
Nonsense. In his book "Ancient Man in Britain" Donald A Macenzy
sugests that some of the men who rowed the "Galley ships " were
Azzilians of the socalled transitional period which I am sugesting was the
"End-Palaeolithic" and were thus I sugest part of Albion's team
although Albion ruled from Northern France untill his defeat in 2044 BC by
Herculese Nimrod's General although in conclusion the decendents of Albion
were still here in 1996 BC and probably helped in this first construction of
StoneHenge of which I am sugesting the second allignement or construction (of
which Graham reckons there were three); was reconstructed by Hu G's men ca
1421/1365 BC and supposedly fell into disuse by the archaeolical "Iron
Age" (By Graham's dating 700/750 BC. Thus it is also possible that it
could also have been "realigned" by Merlin in the reign of King
Arthur according to Geoffry of Monmouth. Thus this would most probably make
four reallignements of StoneHenge
:From JXF to DW
> Interesting Link,
>
> "The henge has been tentatively dated to 2400 BCE. But flint
> arrowheads found at the stone-circle site are of a type that suggests
> the rocks were erected as early as 3000 BCE. More precise dates will
> have to wait until prehistoric deer antlers-used as pickaxes at
> Bluestonehenge-have been radiocarbon dated, the team said."
> "Bluestonehenge's stones were dragged along the avenue to Stonehenge
> during a major rebuilding phase around 2500 BCE, the archaeologists
> speculated (time line of the stages of Stonehenge)."
>
> 1) need to do an accurate radiocarbon test first. 2,400 BC is only tentative.
> 2) The 3,000 BC date is based on flint arrowheads - which we can't use
> for dating.
> 3) If 3,200 BC radiocarbon is actually about 2200 BC, then 2,400 BC is
> much lower.
> Snefru is radiocarbon dated about 2,140 BC, and is actually 1950 to
> 1926 BC, so 2,400 BC is probably just before the time of Abraham, about 2050 BC or so.
> 4) Partholan was too late - 2024 BC for the start of his reign - after
> his battle.
> 5) This represents a rebuilding phase. Odd. The Travels of Noah book suggests:
> Samothes' colony arrived in France about 2,162 BC which is 68 year
> earlier than HLH who places him there in 2094 BC. However, 2,162 BC
> is early enough that Samothes' colony could have worked on the rebuilding.
> 6) So who did it the first time? Assuming any of these dates are
> actually close.
> To require rebuilding suggests that some time had passed from the
> first construction.
> So if the rebuilding occurred in about 2050 BC or so, then one would
> expect that the first construction was about at least 2,150 BC or
> earlier. 2150 BC would correspond with a 3,050 BC Radiocarbon type
> date. So that would only leave the Sideon gang or the Survey Teams as
> possibilities.
>
> So a lot more information is really needed to make any good
> suggestions, but we have plenty of time to find out more.
>
> Darrell
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:13:46 +0000
>> Subject: Additional Details on "Bluestonehange"SOS"
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>>
>> Darrell I've just "Dug Up " another link on "Stonepages". It says the
>> monument of Stonehenge was built about 5000 yrs ago (3000 BC)
>> again=2035 BC. Is this a Mere coincidence? What I am thinking is that
>> the first monument might have been put up in 2035 BC and the second
>> one about 1996 BC John
Plannets (RC Dating &c) InboxX
john hext-fremlinHi Darrell I'll keep my present time line for now on Stonehenge at time of Ab...
Jan 28 (3 days ago)
Darrell WhiteHi John, I aggree, there is no reason to update your time line. All new infor...
Jan 29 (2 days ago)
john hext-fremlinI aggree Darrell; since the celts and druids are the best possible fit we hav...
Jan 30 (1 day ago)
john hext-fremlinOn Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Darrell White
Jan 30 (1 day ago)
Darrell WhiteJohn, If indeed there is a solid date fir Durrington Walls then that site can...
12:10 PM (6 hours ago)
5:55 PM (54 minutes ago)
Reply |john hext-fremlin to Darrell
show details 5:59 PM (49 minutes ago)
dateSun, Jan 31, 2010 at 5:59 PM
subjectRe: Stonehenge as Man's obsession with the Plannets (RC Dating &c) mailed-bygooglemail.com
hide details 5:59 PM (49 minutes ago)
Hi Darrell yes I thinkit is but I'll check and make sure. I was of oppinion as you advised me that 2600 BC time frame would match Ussher's date of 1996 to 1821 BC time frame for Druids and Celts. John
On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Darrell White
- Hide quoted text -
> John,
>
> If indeed there is a solid date fir Durrington Walls then that site
> can be reasonable estimated. But is that even solid? I hope it is.
>
> As for stonehenge - I thought I had heard so many different dates
> suggested by the secular scholars that it seemed we had no solid date
> to go by.
>
> If one just assumes stonehenge was built about the same time as
> Durrington Walls, then it is good to state that assumption when
> listing the date for stonehenge.
>
> Darrell
>
>
>> Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:45:18 +0000
>> Subject: Re: Stonehenge as Man's obsession with the Plannets (RC
>> Dating
>> &c)
>>
>> I aggree Darrell; since the celts and druids are the best possible
>> fit we have;; I don't reckon anythiing would be achieved (although I
>> would'nt steak my life on it) by going back into the deep Prehistoric
>> "Mists of Time" and as you correctly say "No Traces of metal weopenry
>> &c" might be found to match this time peiod . As for Samothes I
>> reckon being he and his group were hunter gatherers (Late
>> Palaeolithic
>> industries) I found the best possible fit was Holinshead's chronicle
>> and Milton who both have him arriving in England arround 2148 BC 200
>> after the flood and also Albion who both confirm that he ruled
>> Britain for 44 yrs thus 2088 to 2044 BC. As for radio carbon dating
>> stone tools like you say cannot be dated. I sugest on the contrary
>> the tools and arrow heads etc were found at Durrington Walls
>> (Stonehenge's Neolithic village or city however you would like to
>> interpret it) and Durrington walls is dated to ca 2600 plus years BC
>> and were contemporary. Thus if you like in conclusion the Village
>> dates the stone tools and artifacts in Ussherian chronology thus 1996
>> to1821 BC at time of Abraham.John
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Darrell White
>> > Hi John,
>> >
>> > I aggree, there is no reason to update your time line. All new
>> > information is far to filmsy to suggest any revesions.
>> >
>> > I did not try to date when Noah started his Journey to Europe, but
>> > a book on the Incas also suggests that he visited the Greek area
>> > before Babel fell.
>> > I still find the references to his travels as quite questionable -
>> > much of it appears fabricated - just speculation by a chronologist.
>> > However, I think they may have had access to some of Bersos' works
>> > which are lost today. Thus it is worth reading and comparing to
>> > definite timelines.
>> >
>> > It will be hard to ever figure out stonehenge. Radio carbon
>> > testing would have to be on some living remains - not stones or
>> > impliments. It would also have to be on the oldest such remains.
>> > There is no guarentee that the original remains exist or if they
>> > exist, that they will be found. Hopefully additional historical
>> > references might help. As it is right now, that is, based on the
>> > information we have, anyone of three possibilities exist and even
>> > they could be way off.
>> >
>> > Fortunately, we have historical records of the earliest
>> > colonizations of Ireland and Scotland and we have site which are
>> > clearly the earliest settlements. This makes for a relatively easy
>> > identification. Same for Tier in Germany. If we can find the same
>> > types of information from France, then we might be able to trace
>> > movement of the Celtic population. We have historical references
>> > suggesting they first colonized on the Rhone near the Med. Sea.,
>> > and then moved north. Can you check for the most ancient towns in
>> > France. It may impact the history of southern Britain significantly.
>> >
>> > Darrell
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:48:30 +0000
>> >> Subject: Stonehenge as Man's obsession with the Plannets (RC
>> >> Dating &c)
>> >> Hi Darrell I'll keep my present time line for now on Stonehenge at
>> >> time of Abraham (1996-1821 BC) as a memory of catastrophe at Babel
>> >> 2191 BC (which is my sugested magour course of Ice Age by
>> >> disintegration of Ice Plannet) untill we can find when the first
>> >> construction was done (2230 BC maybe). How will you do accurate
>> >> radio carbon test for Stonehenge? John
JXF and DW: re DRUIS
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:00 PM, john hext-fremlin
> Hi Darrell yes I think you're right however where HLH made his biggest
> mistake (I think was a Printing error) by placing the flood 2369/2368
> BC which is 20 yrs off which should 2348 BC. Saaronides tribes are
> dated 1997 BC which I have for the Druids and Celts at your recomended
> date of 1996 to 1821 BC fitting the time of Abraham as in our
> Stonehenge discussion. As for Nimrod's reintroduction of the neolithic
> industry I have 2094 as an estimate (like you say Darrell between 2100
> and 2090 BC. That would fit well with compendium of world history thus
> holinshed and compendium in some considerable aggreement. The ownly
> "witness " I have here is the guy who wrote "Paradise Lost" and
> mentions Albion's 44 year rule of Britain. John
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Darrell White
>> Hi John,
>>
>> Glad you found the reference to Druis in HLH. One of HLH's biggest
>> problems was attempting to identify fameous ancients as the founders of all nations.
>> This
>> sometimes causes misidentifications and thus erroneous chronology.
>> But overall he did very well - at least he points to lots of good
>> references.
>>
>> I really do not remember what Holinshed said about Samothes, will
>> have to look it up again. However, Noah's travels seems to be a
>> second witness suggesting an earlier date for Samothes. Thus your
>> current fit seem reasonable, although not absolutely confirmed by a
>> second witness. I will try to see if I can detect what HLH did
>> wroung, since I assume he must be in error here.
>>
>> Darrell
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:39:42 +0000
>>> Subject: Druis (Compendium of World History Volum One) Importent SOS
>>> Hi Darrell I have found Druis. He reigned from 1936 BC to 1922 BC
>>> according to HLH. However I found Saronides ancestor of the
>>> "sacrificing Priests who ruled from 1997 BC. Is he Sarronides also a
>>> decendent of Samothes. Samothes seemsto be from HLH's time line that
>>> he ruled from 2094 to 2048. (This can't be right can it? ) I have
>>> him from 2148 BC to 2088 BC untill Albion came here. This is
>>> recomended by you from Holinshead's chronicle (although Holinshed a
>>> chronologist not ancient chronickler) I find Holinshed the better
>>> fit from what I've read of Milton's History of Britain with the 44 yr reign of Albion.
>>> HLH seems to have got things "Back to Front" in some respects. I
>>> find my proposed fit of 2094 BC for Nimrod's introduction of
>>> agriculture or Neolithic cultures also a good fit for the time HLH
>>> estimates Samothes. Note HLH also mentions "Ninus or Ninius" . Is this Nimrod?
>>> This thus seems an exelent fit for the date of 2094 BC as a
>>> reasonable estimate given you have said Nimrod world wide introduced
>>> aggricultural or at best reintroduced it between 2100 and 2090 BC so
>>> thought I'd use 2094 as an update estimate. John
