Monday, August 14, 2006

Human Migrations and the Rh Blood Protein - LexiLine Journal 424

We are subject to all kinds of laws and chief among these are the laws of genetics, which are definitely supreme over the laws made by men. Religious zealots of all persuasions should consider the fact that what some might view to be "God in action" is found in all of us in the unique genetic blueprint of each of our organisms, regardless of our religious affiliation.

A special category in genetics is comprised by our blood types, especially the ABO and Rh blood groups. In our modern age, many citizens of civilized nations know their own ABO blood group (A, B, O, or AB) and most also know whether they are Rh-positive or Rh-negative, since this knowledge can be essential for healthy childbearing.

A recent question from a reader of LexiLine about the origin and mutation of the Rh protein led the me to do a bit of research, which is my specialty, leading to a remarkable potential discovery about the cause for the Rh-negative mutation.

For a bit of background information, we refer to a mathematically produced dendrite of the world distribution of blood groups, adapted from A. Kelus and J. Lukaszewicz (authors of Taksonomia wroclawska w zastosowaniu do zagadnien seroantropologii Archiwum Immunol. terap. Doswiadizalnej 1 245-254 , 1953), as presented in Ludwig Hirszfeld (also Hirschfeld or Hirsfeld), Probleme der Blutgruppenforschung (book review here, or see Footnote 1 below).

Also for background, we refer to a very short discussion of the prevalence of Rh-negative in certain ethnic groups by Steve Mack, Post-doc/Fellow, Molecular and Cell Biology, Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute.

A chart of the ethnic distribution of Rh+ (Rh-positive) and Rh- (Rh-negative) blood alleles (based on data from the American Association of Blood Banks, AABS) is found at the bottom of the article at http://www.pjms.com.pk/issues/aprjun05/article/article14.html [link no longer active but the chart showed that Rh- distribution in Europe is very high whereas there is almost none in Africa.]
The distribution table is located just before the conclusion section of the article at the end.

All modern genetic DNA evidence points to an "out-of-Africa" origin for humanity. Hence, it is our view that Rh+ (Rh-positive) is the original Rh blood allele in humans, since black Africans in Africa who have not mixed either with white populations or with mixed-race persons have ONLY this Rh allele and no evidence of Rh- (Rh-negative).

Since Rh- (Rh-negative) is an allele which is found predominantly among white populations (ca. 40-45% in Europe), it must clearly be a mutation which followed after man's migrations from Africa to Europe.

Moreover, Rh-negative is found much more frequently among A and O blood groups, which are the major blood types in Western Europe, whereas Rh-negative is much rarer among persons with B and AB blood types, i.e. the more Asiatic blood types. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_type

New research has been published about the Rh protein by Sydney G. Kustu and William Inwood, and we think that it is so important that it will ultimately be awarded the Nobel Prize in Medicine because of its fundamental potential impact on biological and genetic research.

See http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2005/05/25_rhesus.shtml and
S. Kustu and W. Inwood, Biological gas channels for NH3 and CO2: evidence that Rh (Rhesus) proteins are CO2 channels, Transfus. Clin. Biol. (Transfusion Clinique et Biologique (Paris), 13:103-10, 2006. [TCB (abstract)] and
Kwang-Seo Kim, Eithne Feild, Natalie King, Takuro Yaoi, Sydney Kustu, and William Inwood, Spontaneous Mutations in the Ammonium Transport Gene AMT4 of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, Genetics, Vol. 170, 631-644, June 2005, [Abstract] [Full Text] [Supplemental Data] )

As noted in the Berkeley article (under the graphic caption) the Rh protein plays a significant role as a channel for CO2 gas (carbon dioxide) across cell membranes in the body:

"Rh proteins act as gas channels that help speed the transfer of carbon dioxide (CO2) in and out of red blood cells. CO2 can also pass through the cell membrane unaided (above right), but not quickly enough."

The PubMed Abstract writes:

"Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, 111 Koshland Hall, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720-3102, USA. kustu@nature.berkeley.edu

Physiological evidence from our laboratory indicates that Amt/Mep proteins are gas channels for NH3, the first biological gas channels to be described. This view has now been confirmed by structural evidence and is displacing the previous belief that Amt/Mep proteins were active transporters for the NH4+ ion. Still disputed is the physiological substrate for Rh proteins, the only known homologues of Amt/Mep proteins. Many think they are mammalian ammonium (NH4+ or NH3) transporters. Following Monod's famous dictum, "Anything found to be true of E. coli must also be true of elephants" [Perspect. Biol. Med. 47(1) (2004) 47], we explored the substrate for Rh proteins in the unicellular green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. C. reinhardtii is one of the simplest organisms to have Rh proteins and it also has Amt proteins. Physiological studies in this microbe indicate that the substrate for Rh proteins is CO2 and confirm that the substrate for Amt proteins is NH3. Both are readily hydrated gases. Knowing that transport of CO2 is the ancestral function of Rh proteins supports the inference from hematological research that a newly evolving role of the human Rh30 proteins, RhCcEe and RhD, is to help maintain the flexible, flattened shape of the red cell.
PMID: 16563833 [PubMed - in process]
"
Hence, it would seem to be a likely hypothesis to this observer, presented here for the first time, that Rh- (Rh-negative) developed due to a (presumably beneficial) change mandated in our human breathing of the Earth's air in the more northerly European latitudes.

This would make sense since there is in fact a global air-sea flux of CO2 (carbon dioxide) which could correspond to the mutation we see in Rh from Africa (Rh+) to Western Europe (Rh-). As noted in a Colloquium of the US National Academy of Sciences:
"Temperate and polar oceans of the both hemispheres are the major sinks for atmospheric CO2, whereas the equatorial oceans are the major sources for CO2. The Atlantic Ocean is the most important CO2 sink, providing about 60% of the global ocean uptake, while the Pacific Ocean is neutral because of its equatorial source flux being balanced by the sink flux of the temperate oceans. The Indian and Southern Oceans take up about 20% each."
(The above is quoted from the Abstract of Taro Takahashi, Richard A. Feely, Ray F. Weiss, Rik H. Wanninkhof, David W. Chipman, Stewart C. Sutherland, and Timothy T. Takahashi, Global air-sea flux of CO2: An estimate based on measurements of sea–air pCO2 difference, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 94, pp. 8292–8299, August 1997, colloquium paper presented at a colloquium entitled "Carbon Dioxide and Climate Change," organized by Charles D. Keeling, held November 13–15, 1995, at the National Academyof Sciences, Irvine, CA.)

In other words, the Rh mutation from Rh+ (Rh-positive) to Rh- (Rh-negative) is arguably environmental in cause, with the human body adjusting to different CO2 and oxygen conditions as present in Western Europe and as opposed to those prevalent in the original homeland of Africa, as evidenced by the differing atmospheric CO2 sinks prevailing in oceans bordering on the two different geographic locations. Presumably, the reason for the mutation was in part "the air" (and climate) and the human body's changed oxygen (O2) / carbon dioxide (CO2) balance.

We presume that the reason for the mutation can also be analogized to the body's reaction to decreased levels of oxygen at higher altitudes, which leads to substantial biological reactions:
"Adaptation to a lower oxygen environment causes the body to produce a chain of biological reactions. The heart and lungs are stimulated to increase their functions and even over the long term, to increase in size. Blood vessels dilate and new capillaries are formed in the heart, brain and skeletal muscles. In the blood, levels of erythropoietin (EPO), haemoglobin, myoglobin and 2,3 diglycerophosphate increase. All these factors make the blood capable of carrying more oxygen and on a cellular level there is a growth of the cellular structures needed for the metabolism of oxygen. After IHT (Intermittent Hypoxic Treatment) the lactate threshold increases indicating that the body is utilising available oxygen more efficiently."
The same holds true for thermoregulation, i.e. the body's response to temperature. The Medical Department of the U.S. Army has published a book titled Medical Aspects of Harsh Environments (Volume I), which contains a great amount of relevant information about human adaptation and human physiological responses to heat and cold. A map of the average wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) index in the northern hemisphere during July is shown at page 103 of that volume and a similar map at page 105 of that volume shows the relationship between selected regional skin temperatures and core body temperature at rest over a range of temperate and hot climatic conditions.

It is clear from the discussion in subsequent pages of that volume that thermoregulation is related to oxygen uptake and thus of course, conversely, to carbon dioxide expulsion. Moreover, not only does the respiratory system react significantly to heat and cold (see page 366 of that volume), but this is accompanied by changes in the solubility of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the blood (p. 368):

"as the temperature decreases, the solubility of carbon dioxide in blood increases."

Since the Rh protein affects the rate at which carbon dioxide "channels through" cell membranes, its role may well be comparable in respiration to that found for ion pathways in the plasma membrane. As noted at page 179 of that volume:

"Ions do not readily cross lipid bilayers despite their large concentration gradients across plasma membranes. In general, they require specialized channels or carriers to do so..... Membrane channels are proteins that contain hydrophilic pores that penetrate the lipid bilayer, permitting the diffusion of specific ions down their electrochemical gradients to enter or leave cells."

Given the fact that "the Rh polypeptide is a major fatty acid-acylated erythrocyte membrane protein", i.e. an element of our red blood cells - which transport oxygen to the blood, the discovery that Rh proteins act as gas channels for carbon dioxide in living organisms is one of the most important discoveries made in medicine (and genetics) - ever.

__________
Footnote 1

The book review in German at SpringerLink.com by L. Ballowitz of Hirszfeld, L., Probleme der Blugruppenforschung, is reproduced here:

"BUCHBESPRECHUNGEN

Hirszfeld L.: Probleme der Blutgruppenforschung. Mit einem Geleitwort von Prof. Dr. O. Prokop, Berlin. 160 Seiten, 29 Abbildungen, 64 Tabellen. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena 1960. Preis: Gln. DM 22,-

Für jeden, der an blutgruppenserologischen Fragen interessiert ist, wird diese ausgezeichnete Zusammenschau über die Entwicklung der Lehre von den Blutgruppen äußerst anregend sein. Hirszfeld ist seit etwa 40 Jahren durch zahlreiche, zum Teil bahnbrechende Arbeiten mit an dem raschen Anwachsen der Kenntnisse auf diesem Gebiet beteiligt. Auch in dem vorliegenden Buch ist vor allem die äußerst vielseitige, weitschauende und doch kritische Interpretation der erhobenen Befunde bemerkenswert. Besonders ausführlich sind Fragen der Vererbung von Blutgruppen, solche der Anthropologie, ferner Möglichkeiten der Vaterschafts- und Mutterschaftsausschließung sowie die Immunpathologie der Schwangerschaft abgehandelt. Eine gute Orientierung ist über die von dem Verf. entwickelte Pleiaden- und Abortus-Theorie möglich. Durch das Einfügen persönlicher Erfahrungen wird die Darstellung angenehm aufgelockert. Prokop gebührt Dank, daß er die Veröffentlichung dieses 1953 abgeschlossenen und vom Verf. hinterlassenen Buches möglich machte.

L. Ballowitz, Berlin
"

______________

Joe Hare replied:


This is very reminiscent of the "nature" vs "nurture" argument in psychology. If I understand the argument it is that because Modern People of African descent are mostly positive vis a vis the RH factor and Modern day Europeans have the RH negative factor--AND --someone dicovered that there was a connection to CO2 levels--ergo Modern Europeans--are out of Africa?

Not saying it isn't possible mind you--but one wonders about the influence of the Cro-Magnon/Neanderthal occupation of the territory ---I want to say that was about a 20,000 year co-incident occupation period in Europe. Borrow a gene here --trade one there--who knows?

I'm thinking that blood chemistry is kind of a windy corner to posit a theory. I'm more inclined to go with DNA than blood chemistry. And yes I am aware that some studies were done in that regard to prove the Out of Africa Theory. However, I am not aware of any Cro-Magnon/Neanderthal DNA studies--But then my research is limited--read that--I am as smart as the last expert I talked to--or read.

Expanding on the above--has any RH data been gathered / corrollated with the Chinese or Indian populations? Again--I am thinking about large population segments existing --and Lord knows those Mongol lads did get around in Central Europe. And that was late in the game. When did the Scythians become Celts? I need to get out more--LOL!
______________

Andis Kaulins replied:

Based on your comments, I see that I need to express some things more clearly on my part.

I agree with you that DNA provides us with the best proof for the out-of-Africa hypothesis.

For the DNA evidence, we can look e.g. to: Mitochondrial DNA Clarifies Human Evolution

But also our blood groups are very close to the Chimpanzees and Gorillas. See e.g.:
The Long Foreground: Human Prehistory

However, I did not mean to imply in my Rh blood protein posting that the recent findings "prove" the out-of-Africa theory. Rather, my argument is that if the out-of-Africa hypothesis is true, as I think it is (even the Neanderthals are regarded to be out-of-Africa, but in another time frame) then the new knowledge about the Rh blood protein - derived from a study of the Rh protein in algae - points the way to explain the Rh blood proteins in humans as responses to oxygen and carbon dioxide environment.

Obviously, there is still a long way to go, but if the finding in algae is verified in humans that the Rh protein functions as a channel for carbon dioxide (CO2) transport through blood cell membranes - and this still needs to be verified - then scientific research will have made a gigantic leap in understanding fundamental changes in the genetic material of living things.

It is true that the current Neanderthal discussion is vexing. What I myself have seen written about the Neanderthals in past and present writings seems mostly to consist of overly broad conjectures based on very little evidence. I am of the impression that neither laymen, nor the news media, nor even mainstream scientists know enough about this yet. See in this regard also Michael P. Germano and his posting on Neanderthals Again? Has the Media Got It Right?

What is significant is the geographic area in which we have thus far found Neanderthal remains, which largely corresponds to what we would today call Europe. See http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_2.htm

A number of years ago, before it became fashionable, I suggested that humans formed from an interbreeding of two primate groups, based upon blood types. See http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi9.htm , see in this regard also http://www.dadamo.com/wiki/wiki.pl/Related_blood_group_factors_in_animals where it is written:
"In the ABO blood group system, humans and chimpanzees both have A blood group antigens, but the DNA nucleotide sequences are different. The differences are not minor.

Surprisingly, humans and gorillas both have blood group B, and their DNA nucleotide sequences are pretty much identical, with only minor differences."

However, I would imagine that such interbreeding, if it occurred, would have to have taken place before Man arrived in Europe. Indeed, where the territories of gorillas and chimpanzees in Eastern Africa meet is where we find the first evidence of human skulls. How the Neanderthals fit into this picture is still anybody's guess and will ultimately have to be decided by deciphering their human genome, as is being done.

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Star Navigation - If it is OK for Birds, why not for Neolithic Man? - LexiLine Journal 423

One of the things that has puzzled me greatly over the years is the remarkable (and in my view utterly unfounded) resistance that mainstream academics manifest: 1) against the idea that ancient (Neolithic) man navigated on Earth by astronomy, both by land and by sea, and; 2) against the corresponding idea that ancient man used the stars and other simple astronomical parameters in setting ancient landmarks and borders as "hermetic" marks of orientation.

How absolutely contrary to common sense (for the birds) the mainstream academic position waxes on this issue can be demonstrated by casting a glance at ornithology (bird watching), which is currently in the science news for some new insights on how birds migrate. See Physorg.com and their recent article "30-year puzzle solved: Light guides flight of migratory birds ".

It is not only light from the Sun during the day that guides migratory birds but also star patterns for nocturnal migrations. As written at the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center (NPWRC, U.S. Department of Interior, U.S. Geological Survey) on the Migration of Birds, Orientation and Navigation :
"Using the artificial night sky provided by planetariums demonstrated that nocturnal migrants respond to star patterns. (quite analogous to Kramer's work on solar orientation, Franz Sauer demonstrated that if the planetarium sky is shifted, the birds make a corresponding shift in their orientation azimuth. Steve Emlen was able to show that the orientation was not dependent upon a single star, like Polaris, but to the general sky pattern. As he would turn off more and more stars so that they were no longer being projected in the planetarium, the bird's orientation became poorer and poorer. While the proper direction for orientation at a given time is probably innate, Emlen was able to show that knowing the location of "north" must be learned. When young birds were raised under a planetarium sky in which Betelgeuse, a star in Orion of the southern sky, was projected to the celestial north pole, the birds oriented as if Betelgeuse was "north" when they were later placed under the normally orientated night sky, even though in reality it was south!"
My comment to all of this is - did they expect that birds oriented and navigated by magic? Obvious to this observer is the conclusion that other living things are going to use the same obvious basic systems for orientation and navigation that are/were available to modern and ancient Man, i.e. primarily the Sun during the day and the Stars at night.

But how do we get this message through to the people who occupy chairs of astronomy or archaeology (and related disciplines) at the world's universities? Any suggestions anyone has out there will be appreciated.

Our question for mainstream academia is the title of this posting: "Star Navigation - If it is OK for Birds, why not for Neolithic Man?" [nearly 4 years later - there is still no answer from the blindered men and women in the hallowed halls of the world's universities]
__________

John (*Northstar) replied:

Always enjoy your thoughts Andis. There are also studies that show
that long distance migration is influenced by the earths magnetic
field. Knowing the holistic tendencies of 'nature', there are
probably species that combine visual and magnetic, giving
different 'weights' to both systems. It would be interesting to
know how geomagnetics might counter or buffer precession, as an
example. But I digress...

Nice to see you use the term 'hermetics', albeit in a minimalist
form. We should not be so foolish as to believe that there were
civilizations preceeding all those presently known who were less
advanced than we are now. They may not have used oil for power and
advancement, but they were certainly NOT ignorant.

When I ponder on all the knowledge that was lost in the burning of
the Library at Alexandria, and more recently all the information
cleansed by the Roman Catholic Church in its 'information wars'...it
seems less strange that we would have no knowledge of those coming
long before these events...even if they had advanced language and
sciences. A society frowning on outward manifestations of 'ego'and
limited to natural material may not have left us the clues we are
used to looking for. I applaud you for your continued and accurate
thinking 'outside the box'. After my last error riddled email to
you, I do hope some of your ability rubs off on me.

Best Regards, John

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Stars Stones and Scholars in Hardcover - LexiLine Journal 422

Stars Stones and Scholars: The Decipherment of the Megaliths,
is now available in hardcover(ISBN number141220135-7) at the following booksellers online:

AMAZON

Amazon.com - USA
Amazon.ca - Canada
Amazon.co.uk - UK
Amazon.de - Germany
Amazon.fr - France
Amazon.jp - Japan

BARNESANDNOBLE
BOOKSAMILLION
SUPERBOOKDEALS
PICKABOOK

The book is printed on demand - and the wonderful thing about this kind of printing is that a book published in this manner virtually never goes out of print and can be ordered at any time in the future, even 10, 20, 50 or 100 years down the road - in any quantity desired.

This book will become more and more important as the years go by as mainstream archaeologists and historians of astronomy - slowly - begin to grasp the fact that prehistoric man was an astronomer and that many aspects of man's life in ancient days, especially knowledge, landmarking and belief systems (religion), were closely related to astronomy.

As the great Sir Bertrand Russell, "British philosopher, logician, essayist, and social critic " wrote 2 years after my birth in Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits, Simon and Schuster, Clarion Books, New York, 1948:
"Astronomy is the oldest of the sciences, and the contemplation of the heavens, with their periodic regularities, gave men their first conceptions of natural law."
Russell further opined that the legacy of astronomy in our "way of life" carries down to the present day, writing:
"Although we are taught the Copernican astronomy in our textbooks, it has not yet penetrated to our religion or our morals....

How far has the American outlook on life and the world influenced Europe, and how far is it likely to do so? And first of all: What is the distinctively American outlook? And what, in comparison, is the distinctively European outlook?

Traditionally, the European outlook may be said to be derived from astronomy. When Abraham watched his flocks by night, he observed the stars in their courses: they moved with a majestic regularity utterly remote from human control.

When the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, He said: 'Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?' The reply was in the negative. Even more relevant is the question: 'Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
" [emphasis added]

Tuesday, August 8, 2006

The Terrestrial Planisphere of Oesterholz Germany - LexiLine Journal 421

The German magazine SYNESIS (see Efodon) in its just published issue (Nr. 76, Volume 13, Issue 4, August/September 2006), contains the German-language printed version of my article,
"Der Bodenhimmel der Oesterholzer Mark um die Spitze der 'Externstein-Pyramide'",
[The Terrestrial Planisphere of Oesterholz at the 'Pyramid of the Extern Stones']
(the original, higher resolution .pdf is found here and the limited Power Point Presentation here)

which was initially presented this year as a paper at the 40th conference of the
Walther Machalett Association for Prehistory and Early History
(Arbeits- und Forschungskreis Walther Machalett für Vor- und Frühgeschichte e.V.)
[since then reconstituted and renamed as Der Forschungskreis Externsteine e. V.]
held May 24-28, 2006 in Horn/Bad Meinberg, Germany.

The German-language version of the article is also available from the
[Der Forschungskreis Externsteine e. V.] as
"Das Heinecke System Frühgeschichtliche Externsteiner Visurlinien"
(Schriftliche Fassung der Referate, gehalten auf der 40. Jahrestagung des Arbeitskreises
Walther Machalett am 27 Mai 2006 in Horn/Externsteine")
which contains articles relating to German archaeoastronomy
by Günter Heinecke, Gert Meier, Max Seurig and Andis Kaulins as follows
(content text taken from the CD-ROM):
"Inhalt:
1. Das Heinecke-System: Frühgeschichtliche Externsteiner Visurlinien auf Sonne und Mond
I. Teil: : Die Darstellung des Systems II. Teil: Die Deutung des Systems
(Meier)
2. Der Drachenkopf auf dem Wormsberg zu Berlebeck (Heinecke)
3. Der Bodenhimmel der Oesterholzer Mark um die Spitze der Externsteinpyramide
(Kaulins)
4. Die untere Grotte von Felsen 1 der Externsteine: Der Nabel der Welt? (Seurig)"
This CD-ROM as well as the preceding CD-ROM from the 39th Machalett Conference,
"Frühgeschichtliche Astronomie in Norddeutschland", can each be ordered through
[Der Forschungskreis Externsteine e. V.]
at the following address:
Forschungskreis Externsteine e. V.
Postfach 1155
32792 Horn – Bad Meinberg
fk-externsteine@gmx.de
I will try to publish this article in an English translation in the near future, but this will be a while yet.

Monday, August 7, 2006

Timelines on The Evolution of Civilization - LexiLine Journal 420

Steve Burdic recently sent the following links
involving attempted timelines
on the evolution of civilization
by R.D. (Dick) Garneau

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro2.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro3.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro4.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro5.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro6.htm
http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dgarneau/euro-e.htm

These should not be taken as any kind of official timelines but they do show the complexity of the immense scope of issues which are involved in determining the chronology of civilization and the events involved.

The Mysterious mtDNA Haplogroup U Subgroup U5 - LexiLine Journal 419

Steve Burdic recently sent the following message:

"I came across the attached web page and address
[ https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html ]
concerning mapping of the human genome. They have used a lot of traditional archeological information to base their conclusions on. This has probably not been helpful in some instances.

However, the interactive maps and genetic information are very informative. Particularly interesting to me is the discussion of the U5 subgroup originating near the Black Sea, moving north into the Baltic and then moving back into north Africa. [Lexiline Comment: see https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/atlas.html , click "GENETIC MARKERS" lower right, then "Select a Marker" - U, which does not always result in text, you may have to try it once or twice to get the required text]

Do you know of other sites that contain this type of genetic mapping. I have been looking at your cultural Dendrite and blood group information for years. Thanks for that
." [see http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi23.htm ]

Sunday, July 23, 2006

Sanskrit origins of the names David and Goliath ? - LexiLine Journal 418

> The late Graham Millar traced the myth of David and Goliath to the
> ancient myth of Indra killing the dragon Vrtra in India. He indicated
> that the myth is represented in the constellations. David is
> represented by the constellation Bootes and Goliath is represented by
> the constellation Orion. Millar wrote that the names David and Goliath
> are of Sanskrit origin. Does anyone know what the Sanskrit origins of
> the names David and Goliath are?
> Keith Davis

Keith,

The Wikipedia account of the Biblical tale suggests to us that the "story" of David and Goliath, if taken literally as a historical reality, rather than to be viewed as the application of an older myth, is troublesome:

"Textual conflicts

David may not have been the one to kill Goliath. Elhanan, the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite, is given credit for killing Goliath in 2 Sam 21:19. The KJV adds the phrase "the brother of" before Goliath's name in order to avoid contradicting the story of David's victory.

The KJV insertion is justified by the parallel account of Elhanan's deed at 1 Chron 20:5b, which states that "Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath." The word "Jair" here is "Jaare-oregim" at 2 Sam 21:19b; "oregim" is Hebrew for "weavers," which also appears at the end of both verses. Also, "Lahmi" (Hebrew "´eth-lach·mi´," where "´eth" simply means that Lahmi is the object of the verb "slew") in the former becomes "behth hal·lach·mi´" ("Bethlehemite") in the latter. Hence many scholars view 2 Sam 21:19b to be the result of two scribal errors, with 1 Chron 20:5b as the correct account....

However, other scholars argue that Elhanan may have been the victor over Goliath, but that David was later credited with the deed in order to enhance his reputation. It has been contended that, because of David's introduction to Saul in 1 Samuel 16:19-23, Saul should have known who David was in 1 Samuel 17:55-58 and would not need to ask whose son David is, especially since Jesse, David's father, is also mentioned in the earlier passage.

One response to this is to argue that the earlier passage only implies that the servants of Saul knew that David was the son of Jesse. There is no reason to believe Saul had to have known that Jesse was David's father two years later in Chapter 17.

Another problem is that David is said to have brought Goliath's head to Jerusalem (1 Sam 17:54), though Jerusalem belonged to the Jebusites at the time, which casts some doubt on this detail of the story.
"

"Jabar" ( is this the same origin as Jair, Jaare ?) is an ancient name for Orion, so there might be some mythical astronomical connection, though I think that Millar's setting of David and Goliath as equivalent to Indra and Vrtra in Sanskrit would be an error, since Vrtra, the dragon of heaven, never applies to the constellation Orion.

The "Star of David" was of course the six-sided Hebrew star (hexagram) and could also well have a stellar origin in view of the Hebrew meaning of Mogen David (Star of David) as the "Shield of David" but also as the "Seal of Solomon".

The hexagram as an important symbol in ancient days is in fact related to an ancient Hindic symbol and to ancient comology:
"Six pointed stars have also been found in cosmological diagrams in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. The reasons behind this symbol's common appearance in Indic religions and the West are lost in the mists of antiquity. One possibility is that they have a common origin, or the other possibility is that artists and religious people from several cultures independently created the Star of David shape, which after all is a relatively simple and obvious geometric design.

Within Indic lore, the shape is generally understood to consist of two triangles--one pointed up and the other down--locked in harmonious embrace. The two components are called 'Om' and the 'Hrim' in Sanskrit, and symbolize man's position between earth and sky. The downward triangle symbolizes Shakti, the sacred embodiment of femininity, and the upward triangle symbolizes Shiva, or Agni Tattva, representing the focused aspects of masculinity. The mystical union of the two triangles represents Creation, occuring through the divine union of male and female. The two locked triangles are also known as 'Shanmukha' - the six-faced, representing the six faces of Shiva & Shakti's progeny Kartikeya. This symbol is also a part of several yantras and has deep significance in Hindu ritual worship and mythology.

In Buddhism, some old versions of the Bardo Thodol, also known as The Tibetan Book of the Dead, contain a hexagram with a Swastika inside. It was made up by the publishers for this particular publication. In Tibetan, it is called the 'origin of phenomenon' (chos-kyi 'byung-gnas). It is especially connected with the cult of Vajrayogini, and forms the center part of Her mandala. In reality, it is in three dimensions, not two, although it may be portrayed either way.

In Nouga Kogen of Midland Japan, there rests an ancient idol monument (now enclosed in a preserving pyramid) on which there rests a stone that has on it a hexagram. Its roots trace back to the ancient, local Japanese belief that thousands of years ago, a "god" from the sky came to a temple in Nouga Kogen, the same temple from which the stone was found."

In this manner, the story of David and Goliath, if it had any ancient mythological comparables in the stars, could be followed - but it would be quite a shot in the dark, and veritably impossible to prove. There is no doubt that many of our myths are rooted in celestial beliefs from prehistoric days, but tracing them back is a difficult task.
______________

Keith Davis replied:

Thank you Dr. Kaulins for that detailed information. I am conducting some more research into the origin of the names David and Goliath and should post the message on LexiLine some time this summer. I noticed that one Lexiline posted a message stating that the name Saul derives from the Latvian word for sun.

______________

William Glyn-Jones replied:

If we are looking for a very ancient Orion myth present in many cultures then we probably don't need to look much further than the hammer/mace/club brandishing dragon slaying giant/god figures who stand on mountains that are to be found in Hittite, Phoenician, Vedic, Egyption, and Nordic traditions. Whether Teshub, indra, or some Baal figure, they are invariably shown in the Orion pose, with the mace/hammer/club/smiting Pharoah (or egyptian hunter in the Field of Reeds) brandished up above the the head, the other hand often stretcvhed in fornt as a counterbalance, and often mid stride.

Very old.

_______________

Keith Davis wrote:

Wikipedia states that the name Goliath is a Semitized Indo-European name.

There is much more information on the name David. Traditionally the
name David is said to have been derived from Hebrew Dawidh (beloved,
friend), closely related to Hebrew dodh (beloved, uncle).

In an article on the Habiru, www.reference.com suggests that Dawidh
may be derived from the Hurrian name Dudya (beloved of God); dud
(beloved), Ya (God). The Theoligical Dictionary of the Old Testament
Volume III, page 143 compares the Hebrew word for love (w/ydd) to the
Hurrian word for love (tat).

In another article on David, www.reference.com says that King David
was the pharoah Psusennes II. This pharoah had a star symbol similar
to the Star of David. Dawidh is said to be derived from the Egyptian
word djuat (star).

Some people have suggested that Dawidh comes from the name Toth but
this theory has no substantial support and is very unlikely.

The Lexicon Totius Latinatus Volume V, Onamasticon, page 463 and the
Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, Supplementum Nomina Propria Latina, Volume
III, page 60 both state that David derives both from Hebrew dodh
(beloved) as well as from Hebrew day (strong) yad (hand). They cite
the works of two bishops Augustinus (4th century) and Faustus (5th
century, as well as Psalm 34 for the origin day yad. Psalm 34
commemorates the incident described in 1 Samuel 21:10 when David
(Dawidh) was trying to hide among his enemies at Gath. When he was
recognized by some people he pretended to be insane so that the king
would send him away. Is it possible that Dawidh called himself Dayyad
to trick his enemies?

I checked the name Dayyad. Dayyad the Hunter was a sort of mythical
Assyrian Hercules. Could the myth of Dayyad the Hunter be the basis
for the legend of David and Goliath? Anyway, it is fairly common for
one name to have two or more origins. Dayyad could have assimilated to
the name Dawidh over a period of time.
_______________

Andis Kaulins wrote:

Let me say that I generally agree with F. Graham Millar, who was a perspicacious intellect, that the Biblical story of David and Goliath reflects an ancient tale of the stars (see LexiLine.com at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi21.htm et seq.). It may or may not also reflect a later historical event - but that is not the issue here at the moment.

Millar identifes David with Bootes, his sling with Corona Borealis and Goliath with Orion.

Based on the name information provided to the LexiLine list by Keith Davis, which makes plausible the equating of David with Dayyad and the Assyrian Hercules, we actually do get a better fit in terms of the shape of the stellar constellations, since this would mean that David was originally Hercules (+ Ophiuchus, an interpretation also possible by Millar's own analysis), Bootes the sling, and Corona Borealis the stone for the sling.

The simplest connection to Orion is that as the stars of Orion set in the sky, the stars of Hercules rise in the sky on the other side of the horizon. These are "rival" stars. David is in this manner the eternal opponent of Goliath (Orion) in the heavens.

As written by Arif Babul :
"[T]he use of stories and poetry to remember the various constellations in the sky and their relative positions was a common feature of the Near/Middle East and Mediterranean civilizations. These stories or mnemonic devices in time became entwined with existing stories and legends or may have even taken on a life of their own (so to say), and come down to today in the form of myths ."
We thus find the following statement in a discussion at comparative-religion.com, posted by nogodnomasters:
"The Persians figured that Ursa Minor was the Myrobalanum (plum fruit used in dyeing), or date-palm seed or fruit, which the group stars was thought to resemble. The date palm is seen as a symbol of the world axis (or polar axis), or Tree of Life. ("The righteous shall flourish like the date palm" -Psalm 91: 12). In their Eden or Eridu as it was called the tree was called "the shrine of the two". On an Assyrian cylinder the early couple is pictured as sitting by the seven branched tree with a serpent by the woman."

______________

William Glyn-Jones wrote:

Regarding the tree as the axis of the sky, might the serpent twined within it then be Draco? My research has lead me to the conclusion that this serpent around the pole became the vine in Greek tradition, the one that twines up around the mast of the ship of Dionysos, the pole (thyrsos) of the maenad, the pine tree above the tomb of Ikarios and so on. The logic behind this is that the constellation is circumpolar, circling the pole, like a the vine round around and around the thyrsos pole.
Every aspect of the ship/chariot of Dionysos is a constellation, as Titian understood.
______________

Keith Davis wrote:

Dr. Kaulins, Thank you very much for your reply. Thanks to your insights a much clearer picture is beginning to emerge for me.
______________

Keith Davis wrote:
Ralph Ellis in his book "Solomon Falcon of Sheba" contends that King
David of Israel was Pharoah Psusennes II of Egypt. He derives David
from th Egyptian word djuat (star) since Psusennes II had a star
symbol. Ellis attempts to demonstrate that David's ancestry and
Psusennes' ancestry are actually the same.

If you check the website: www.ancientegyptmagazine.com/reviews26.htm
you will find a review of Ellis' book "Solomon Falcon of Sheba". This
review is written by Michael Tunnicliffe, lecturer on Ancient Egypt
and Biblical History/Archaeology at the universities of Liverpool and
Manchester. Tunnicliffe severely criticizes Ellis' theory.

I encourage LexiLine members who are interested in this topic to check
out this information for themselves and to draw their own conclusions.
______________

Andis Kaulins wrote:

It is in my opinion impossible that Psusennes II of Egypt was the same as King David of Israel because the chronologies are simply too far apart.

As I have previously suggested in my Absolute Chronology of the Ancient World by Astronomy at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi760.htm, I think that King David is equivalent to Pharaoh Sethos I, with King Saul = Echnaton (Akhenaten), King Solomon equivalent to Ramses II and Ramses III equivalent to Shishak. There are many possibilities for corroboration of this alleged equivalence, as posted to my Ancient Egypt Blog at http://ancientegyptweblog.blogspot.com/ .

In addition, we should note that the newly published incontrovertible dating of the explosion of the volcano Santorin on Thera - see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LexiLine/message/1464 - clearly indicates that the chronology of the ancient world must be dated BACKWARDS in time and not forward. This would put the reign of King David at the time of Pharaoh Sethos of Egypt and would mean that the Biblical Hiram of Tyre = Harem-hab. In fact, Haremhab's cartouche has the hieroglyph of the arm holding an object (Latvian TUR "hold" = TYRE), which I think reads TYRE.

The Lion Handbook to the Bible states about the Phoenician Hiram (Hebrew חִירָם "high-born") that he was "King of Tyre, in alliance with David and Solomon; supplied cedar and skilled labour for the temple; joined with Solomon to operate a Red Sea trading fleet...."

In fact, one of the reliefs of Haremhab (Hiram of Tyre) at Saqqara clearly show him with a Phoenician one-horned helmet.

It is instructive that Haremhab's mummy did not appear among those of the Pharaohs found in the mummy depots, which contained the pharaohs of this period, and we can fairly safely presume that the Egyptologists have soundly erred in his identification.
______________

William Glyn-Jones wrote:

Andis, my Biblical knowledge is almost non-existant, but I am just wondering - if David is an Egyptian pharaoh and in the Bible he is the guy who feels compelled to build the temple the manifestation of which is brought about by his son Solomon, would you then say that the temple in question is really one in Egypt, or that the temple in Jerusalem was originally of pharoanic commission, or simply that the story relating to its construction was appended onto the characters of David and Solomon later on?
______________

Keith Davis wrote:

Since King David of Israel was Pharoah Sethos I rather than Pharoah
Psusennes II would the name David still be derived from Egyptian djuat
(star) in reference to the symbol of the Star of David?
______________

Andis Kaulins wrote:

Here is what I have previously written on this topic at the LexiLine website at http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/lexi46.htm :

"SOLOMON'S TEMPLE
Floors of Gold in Pi-Ramesse (Per-Ramses)

One of the most amazing discoveries of all time occurred in 1999 in Egypt. In 1999 Archaeologist Edgar Pusch of the Roemer and Pelizaeus Museum in Hildesheim, Germany discovered the floor remains of an immense temple ruin with the gold dust floors still intact under nearly sixty centimeters of Nile mud about 100 kilometers north of Cairo, Egypt, in the area assigned by Biblical literature to the dwelling place of the Hebrews in Egypt.

Nothing like it has ever been found in Egypt before. Because the cartouche (hieroglyphic insignia of the king) of Ramses II has been found there, the Temple has been assigned to Ramses II.

As shown in other pages of LexiLine and from the revised dating of the birth of Moses to ca. 1700 BC on the authority of Artapanus, Ramses II can only have been the famed King Solomon. Hence the temple floors discovered by Pusch belonged to the destroyed FIRST Temple of Solomon.

It is the temple in which Solomon kept the Ark of the Covenant. The floors are made of a substance into which great amounts of gold dust were mixed. When one walks on them, the shoes leave a trail of gold dust in the air behind, verifying the legend of the wealth of Solomon, according to which even the dust of the streets in Per-Ramses (Pi-Ramesse) was of gold."


Related to this issue in my opinion is the Mishnayot concerning the concealing of the vessels of the temple:

"These Mishnayot ["Records"]
were written by five righteous men.
They are:
Shimur the Levite, Hizkiyah, Zidkiyah, Chaggai the Prophet
and Zechariah, son of Ido the Prophet.


They concealed the vessels of the Temple and the wealth of the treasures
that were in Jerusalem
[The 1st Jerusalem was at Heliopolis, Giza, Per Ramses]
which will not be discovered until the day of the coming of Mashiach,
son of David, speedily in our times, Amen, and so it will be
.
"

See also http://www.lexiline.com/lexiline/cartouche.htm

Currently, some people think that the First Temple Period applied to Solomon's SECOND Temple, which of course is absurd. Solomon's first and only temple was destroyed in Egypt at Per Ramses many years after Solomon's era when the Jews were sent into the Babylonian captivity and when the Assyrians (the invading Arabs) destroyed the First Temple, leading the Jewish priests to hide the contents of the First Temple in the Valley of Kings in King Tut's tomb (this is the account of the Mishnayot). The Second Temple Period began after that in today's Jerusalem in what is now Israel after Cyrus conquered Babylon and gave the Jews in Babylonian Captivity (these were about 10,000 ) their freedom back which allowed them to build a new temple there. It has been presumed that this temple was built on top of the old Temple of Solomon at the same location, but of that, there is not the slighest evidence. Rather, the deported Jews remained at their location in Israel, where they had regained freedom under Cyrus, and built a new, second temple at that new location.

That in any case is how I interpret the available evidence.
______________

Andis Kaulins wrote:

I claim that King David was Sethos I - but we can not yet view this
matter as settled. We still have a long road ahead of us. Just view it
as a good, potentially profitable working hypothesis.

As for the origins of the name David, I think our ideas are still
quite conjectural, but to throw your question back to you - why or why
not djuat? I do not know the answer.

Take a look at the hierogylphs which we today translate as "Tut". What
do you actually read?

If Tut-ankh-amun is Jonathan, Jon-ATON, the son of King Saul - this is
one of my two favorite hypotheses about King Tut - who were both
killed in battle against the Philistines...

and since Jonathan was King David's best "sworn" friend (so the
description in the Lion Handbook to the Bible), then that would
explain Tut's truly royal and splendid burial, in memorium by King
David...

but then what meaning would attach to the "Tut" in what we currently
read as King Tut's name? Would TUT then read "David" ?
______________

William Glyn-Jones wrote:

Re Solomon's Temple: Interesting. Thanks. So presumably you think the -omon part of Solomon is Ahmoun, as with Tutankhahmoun, Ahmoun being the chief deity of the Rameside period. Sorry, I 'm probably going over old ground. Are you aware of the theories about the twin pillars of the temple of Solomon referring to Thebes (Egyptian name "The Southern Pillar") and Heliopolis, the Northern Pillar? Am interested in what you think might be the mechanism by which stories about Egyptian pharaohs became a part of Jewish tradition, but perhaps it is a long story.
______________

Keith Davis wrote:

You have certainly raised some very good points. Ralph Ellis conjectured that Psusennes II was David. He points to 2 glyphs of Psusennes, one of a city and the other of a star. Both remind him of the City of David and the Star of David. He relates the star glyph to the Star of David. This is the basis of his etymology djuat.

I agree that this is highly conjectural. The name David may not be of Egyptian origin at all. It is more likely that Dawidh derives from Hurrian Dudya and that Dayyad later assimilated to Dawidh giving our modern name David those two derivations.