Welcome to Tuscoro.com
Sunday, August 25, 2019
I am looking for some good people; people preferably centralized in Utah but it is not necessary, People who have an unquenchable thirst for wanting to understand the Native American Petroglyphs and what they may mean, I am looking for those who can’t get through the week without going to some new site. I am not looking for the casual enthusiast, I need dedication, the ability to go at the drop of a hat on a new adventure… someone not prisoner to a job.
I have a Non Profit organization, but lack the ability understand it, let alone run it, I am looking for people who wish to take advantage of this as well and help me bring it to realization. Knowledge of organizing and running a non profit is definitely a big plus…
This group is intended for the purpose of participating in the Preservation, Education and Documentation of the Many Native American Pertroglyph and Pictograph sites throughout the west. Preservation includes the digital reconstruction of those sites in danger of being lost forever. Education includes exploring the possibilities and expanding on the research of LaVan Martineau, which in my mind and as a result of 30 years of trying to prove him or disprove him, has proven to be the only source of a plausible answer to this ongoing mystery.
If you have an interest I invite you to contact me for further details and to discuss the possibilities. Tell me why you can help, How and offer any suggestions. You may contact me preferably at firstname.lastname@example.org to open a channel of communication.
Thank you for considering… Daniel Lowe.
Friday, August 2, 2019
Puerco River Ark of the Covenant
Just 150 miles west of the nonexistent trash of the Hebrew Los Lunas Stone site with no Evian pottery, we have a curious petroglyph. I love petroglyph evidence because quite frankly, there isn’t anyone that can offer any rebuttal or argument of any merit, oh sure those who would argue using those old familiar words such as pure conjecture, frivolous, ridiculous or its just doodling yet any attempt to offer any argument just shows all the more how much they don’t know. Until these people have traveled my road and compiled the evidence I have for near 25 years concerning the Native American Petroglyph and trying to prove or disprove the hypothesis of LaVan Martineau, they would do good to remain silent. If one chooses to call that arrogance, then so be it, it is what it is.
Photo Courtesy of Valerie Southwick
I find this petroglyph as not only evidence of the Ark of the Covenant on this continent, but also as evidence of Hebrew decent and presence, evidence of the authenticity of the Book of Mormon and of the knowledge of the Ark. Its purpose and use by these often portrayed as cave people who inhabited this land long before any of the methodology of today’s science was even known, is evidence of those who are of Hebrew decent.
In this section of the book I will do a breakdown of the panel with a subject in mind to see if this suspicious looking glyph may have something to do with the suspect subject, being the Ark of the Covenant. If you wish to somewhat follow along, you might want to read or re-read chapters 16, 17, 18 and two of the documentations at the end of the book Nephite North titled, The Ferron Friends, and the 3 Kings Panel.
Breakdown of the Puerco River Hieroglyph
Now keep in mind that just because I have been doing this for near 25 years does not make me right in what I do here, the mystery of the petroglyphs and hypothesis of being a written language such as Mayan and or Egyptian is far from resolved. After all, we are told and made to believe Mayan and Egyptian are now understood and that we can translate them; this could not be farther from the truth.
In the original breakdown I was having trouble with one combination of symbols being my first impression, a little hammock looking thing above the symbol for open. I originally thought it was a combination of two symbols being Objectionable and Valley (SEE Symbols List, The Rocks Begin to Speak by Lavan Martineau)
Lets start with the most obvious symbol found in the combination of symbols or Hieroglyph, that symbol being the universal symbol for, A designated Place (LaVan Martineau) or a manmade object or place (Author) This concept actually occurs several times within the hieroglyph however the main body of the glyph is this symbol which is representation of the Ark as a whole. It is a complete rectangle or square. If we look at the other examples within the main body we find two more examples as if to say, two more manmade objects and within them are steps.
Within or Into an Object
This is a symbol combination
These symbols for steps can mean literal steps or figurative, steps are for the purpose of reaching a higher place. The word within is added because if you follow the lines incorporated into the steps which make up the interior of this hieroglyph and you find right angles which turn back and within which is the exact meaning of the symbol. Also notice the steps, 4 on one side and 5 on the other including the platform at the bottom representing a level as well, again this is evidence of steps to get to a higher place and is this not exactly what the commandments were for? But why were there only nine steps? This puzzled me knowing well and good what they represented until I reevaluated the history of the so called Ten Commandments.
On top of the main body we have two symbols for Open, why would these be placed in the position of the Cherubs? What was the purpose of the Cherubs in the case of the Ark? Cherubs are always associated with wings and taking individuals to places, Cherubs are known to be present upon receiving the word of God, in the case of the Ark the Cherubs were placed ON the Mercy Seat or lid which is indicated as the very narrow rectangle located just under the symbols for open, and the Lord said there he would be! Between the Cherubs. Now I know it is speculative but it would appear that the Cherubs were for opening a communication channel with God.
But now seemingly blocking or closing the opening of the open symbols is what appears to be a hammock, what better symbol to place at the opening point to indicate at rest or sleeping, but why? We’ll come back to that. I would think that further clarification that this is a hammock is indicated at the one on the left showing a gap between the hammock and the open symbol to show that it can be disconnected so that the mistake I made, is not made, therefore a hammock. The hammock was discovered by the Spaniards when the encountered the Taino Indians. No one knows the exact origins of the hammock but it would appear it was known for a very long time in the new world.
Notice on the top of the narrow rectangle symbolic of the Mercy Seat is the repeated or Sequence [d] symbol for Danger or Hurt, why would this be between the Cherubs (open symbols) and on top of the lid which is also the Mercy Seat? Why would it be dangerous to either sit upon the Mercy Seat, between the Cherubs or Open the lid? Some would say that all the mystical powers portrayed in the ark are nonexistent and are nothing but legends but from what I read there was and is a very real danger in opening it let alone touching the Ark without authority or worthiness to do so.
Assuming the narrow horizontal rectangle located within the body of the main glyph and on top is representation of the lid and or Mercy Seat, what is the same small narrow rectangle at the bottom? My guess would be it is representation of the Table mentioned in Exodus 25:23. Now I have found over the years there are no mistakes in the glyphs, if one occurred it was corrected by rubbing out the mistake and redoing it. I have never found an abnormality that didn’t have meaning and I mention this simply because at the right side of this bottom narrow horizontal rectangle, the bottom line curves and rises for some reason which I do not know at this time, I mention it simply because I feel compelled to do so for future reference and I am sure it will come to me before I am done writing this.
Now we can turn to the little figure with his elbow touching the glyph which makes up the Ark, can this little figure tell us anything? Let’s find out. It might appear that this little figure doesn’t say much but I think you will find it still speaks volumes. The overall figure is formed with a symbol that took me many years to identify, through trial and error several times over I have come to the realization that it is the symbol Linage, Genealogy or Decent from. As you know this was and is very important to the House of Israel simply because of the context of the Covenant made with them being the seed of Abraham. This is one thing I always admired about the Aztec, as far into iniquity they seem to have fallen, they never shirked their responsibility in documenting where they came from, however obeying the conditions given in the Covenant, they may have slacked off a bit, but considering their migrations spans near 4400 years, I’d say they did a pretty good job.
In the breakdown list above and preceding photo you see the symbol for linage, Notice the arms of the subject figure are in opposition and turned upward and in the position of doing and turning aside from, from what? Well as I see it they turned aside or fell from the genealogical teachings as to keeping the pure blood of Israel indicated by the opposition in direction AND indicated by the elbow touching the Ark itself turning away from it and what it represents but more specifically the Lid or Mercy Seat. The body of the figure is slanted to bring in the meaning of Stop[ped] or waiting. Interestingly enough to give further credence to the whole concept is what should be a feather on the head meaning having the Spirit or power of the Holy Ghost, it is falling and takes the shape of instead of the feather, a war club, a clear indication that they had fallen from following the Holy Spirit due to becoming a war like people. And then we have the ears or earrings of which I am not certain that I have this drawing correct and until a personal visit to the site, I can only speculate and if I have this correct the symbols which appear as earrings are the symbol for Gone or from here go. If this is the case it would imply that understanding is gone or their ability to listen.
Now back to the anomaly of the narrow rectangle at the bottom of the Glyph, I knew it would come to me, on the right side of the bottom you see that the line deters from being completely level or flat and it is proportional to what I believe is representation of the table not the Ark, which was to support the Ark while resting. I believe the reason for this imperfection is to convey the message that the table or that which supports it is not flat therefore the ability for the Ark to become un-steady is present or that the Ark is not at its designated resting place and there for in transit.
8 While that man, who was called of God and appointed, that putteth forth his hand to steady the ark of God, shall fall by the shaft of death, like as a tree that is smitten by the vivid shaft of lightning.
Now to put it all together if you haven’t already, This place where the glyph is found was created to tell the story of the Ark being moved as a result of war and iniquity of the people and turning from the teachings, the ark rested here for a time but was not steady nor was it its intended place of rest. However the people have lost the understanding and turned from the Ark, its abilities and the teachings within and have lost the power of the Spirit due to this warring. The people have also turned from the covenant in keeping their covenants and genealogy or linage pure, at this time of their fallen state or iniquity it would be dangerous to try to open the Ark, steady the Ark or use it as it was intended.
It is likely the Ark at the time this hieroglyph was made, was returning to The home of the ancient ancestors, I would estimate the glyph being made at the time Moctezuma II and his people were returning the ark to the North in order the Spaniards did not get their hands on it, but more likely at a time prior to the Spaniards in the time of Moctezuma I, at the end of the Roman and Welsh rule near 1050 AD.
Aztecs and the Ark (Huitzilopochtli)
Wednesday, July 31, 2019
Suggestive and Compelling Archeologic Evidence
Some time ago I wrote two articles one called The Nine Commandments of the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone and a following article called the Puerco River Ark of the Covenant, I had thought of just including the latter but the first of these two lends credence to the latter, perhaps you will see it and perhaps you won’t, but my reasoning for pointing this out is to simply say, regardless of what I have written in the articles, my belief today is that the Los Lunas Stone was carved by cultures who visited the Americas around 775-1050 AD, NOT by the earliest Native Americans. The earliest likelihood in which it could have been carved is about 100 BC, but I lean towards a much later date. Here are the two articles.
The Nine Commandments
and the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone
Historically we have always been taught of the Ten Commandments in almost every work pertaining to the subject reference is always made as “the Ten Commandments,” but do we really have anything from a credible source that says specifically how many commandments were given on the two tablets? Only 3 times in the King James Bible does it say specifically Ten Commandments? Although there are hundreds of Commandments we will only focus on the supposed Ten.
In looking at the accepted version of Ten Commandments we have;
1 AND God spake all these words, saying,
2 I [am] the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:
5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
8 Remember the saboth day, to keep it holy
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day [is] the 526rayish of the LORD thy God: [in it] thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that [is] within thy gates:
11 For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the 526rayish day, and hallowed it.
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13 Thou shalt not kill.
14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15 Thou shalt not steal.
16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour’s.
Seems pretty cut and dry doesn’t it? In the Catholic Bible they have simply removed the second commandment for reasons so very obvious of which is part of the first, and divided the 10th commandment to keep the appearance of the traditional ten. But let’s look at it from another perspective in which does not take away from the content or meaning. Let’s look at this from the perspective of sin. What is the sin associated with the Commandment?
# 1, Sin, Worship of another God other than THEE God.
#2, The sin is the same as #1, be it a false God, wrong God or one made with our hands it is the same and therefore constitutes One commandment given in 3 parts.
# 3 Sin, Taking the Lords Name in Vain. Not cursing which is one of the dumbest thing I have heard, but using the Lords name to get gain.
# 4. Sin, Not Remembering the Sabbath.
# 5 Sin, Not glorifying thy Father and thy Mother ABOVE.
#6 Sin, Shedding of “Innocent” blood.
#7 Sin, Adultery, Giving your love to another who has no right to it, it has nothing to do with sex.
#8 Sin, Stealing, taking what does not belong to you.
#9 Sin, Bearing False witness of which you were no witness to.
#10 Sin, Coveting that which does not belong to you, which is given in 2 parts.
Number one and two are part of the same commandment. Having no other God before him includes every form of God out there whether false, graven image, or the wrong God.
I have heard some argue that they are two separate commandments because each starts with “Thou Shalt Not” and if this is the case are we saying Verse 5 above is a new and separate commandment? Are we saying those which do not have “Thou Shalt Not” preceding them are not commandments? It is suspect by me that the first Commandment is a creation of man long ago as the 2nd covers the same, and the purpose of this creation was to eventually eliminate the second part to justify themselves and leaving the first in its place.
Now I don’t know what school you went to, But I was taught that Jesus Christ is a God, part of the Godhead, and that our Father put him before himself, of his own doing, as a Savior to the world who agreed to give the glory to his Father, and that we do, be it by prayer, ordinances, covenants etc, done in the name of Jesus Christ. If this isn’t putting a God Before God the Father I don’t know what is, so is our Father a Hypocrite or is it more likely that someone didn’t think this through? If the first commandment as we know it were from God, what Gods was he referring to?
We know there are other Gods out there who have their own creations but we have never been taught of them other than their existence or come to know any of them in any way whatsoever, and if you made the choice to worship one of these Gods you know nothing about, do you think they would in anyway acknowledge you, being a true God? So if our God is the creator of this so called first commandment, what would he have meant? Well the only Gods left are false Gods, creations of our minds and are usually manifest by those who create them in the form of Statues, Idols and the creations of their hands and is this not covered in what we know as the second commandment? The first commandment is pointless unless you needed a scapegoat. What we know as the first commandment is a fabrication of man in ancient times; it is not needed and does not change the fact that we should have no other false God before him or what we know as the Trinity.
There are only nine commandments and why have I brought this up? The reason is to give credibility to the Los Lunas Stone in the following section in that it does not have mistakes as so many supposed experts and students of Hebrew have said, it is THEM who is in error and mistaken not the scribe of the stone and I intend to show you this is true which hopefully in the end we will have just one more evidence of ancient Hebrew in the Western regions and to show that someone in the past knew what the scholars of today do not. And there is another reason which will shortly come, the Puerco River Glyph.
The Los Lunas Stone
Los Lunas Stone as it appeared before someone
recently got offended
The Los Lunas Decalogue Stone is said to have been originally discovered in the 1880’s but not officially until it was shown to Frank C Hibben an archaeologist and anthropologist of New Mexico, the very archaeologist who wrote the document called Frozen Muck which I included in the book Nephite North. It is said that it was heavily covered in Lichen and patina when Hibben first saw it; many have discredited the find as a hoax of course because of things such as the repeated cleaning of it and re scratching of the characters and chalking for photos, but more so because of the so called Mistakes and errors found within the text that according to the so called experts, would not have been made. I would agree 100% that a Levitical Scribe or a scribe with knowledge of the Paleo Hebrew would not have made the so called mistakes and errors pointed out. The difference is, I don’t think the scribe made any mistake and it is those who think they have a clear understanding of the Paleo Hebrew or Hebrew who is in error, and those who attempted to change the content.
“The archaeologist Ken Feder points out that “the flat face of the stone shows a very sharp, crisp inscription...”. His main concern however is the lack of any archaeological context. He argues that to get to the location of the stone would have required whoever inscribed it to have “stopped along the way. Encamped, eaten food, broken things, disposed of trash, performed rituals, and so on. And those actions should have left a trail of physical archaeological evidence across the greater American Southwest, discovery of which would undeniably prove the existence of foreigners in New Mexico in antiquity with a demonstrably ancient Hebrew material culture...” and states that “There are no pre-Columbian ancient Hebrew settlements, no sites containing the everyday detritus of a band of ancient Hebrews, nothing that even a cursory knowledge of how the archaeological record forms would demand there would be. From an archaeological standpoint, that’s plainly impossible.”
Wow, I couldn’t even begin to show the blindness of this man, No Hebrew settlements? Does this man read or just listen to all he was taught by his peers? So who were these Indians with more knowledge of the Hebrew ways than anyone ever expected and documented by dozens of the earliest explorers long before Feder’s G G Great Grand Father was even a thought. Encamped, eaten food, etc…? And of the 50 million acres surrounding the site Mr. Feder has personally search all of it? Didn’t anyone show him the ruins on the hill above? If this was the landing place of a certain band of Hebrews by a sea faring ship how are we going to find their trash along the way? What kind of trash should we be looking for? Evian plastic bottles? Forgive me but, Ignorance is no proof of Intelligence…
One only need take a close look to see that whoever the scribe was, he had knowledge that the supposed experts of today do not have. For this reason I am going to talk about the supposed commandment # 5 Thou Shalt Honor thy Mother and Father. In a video that my good friend Alan sent to me, concerning the Los Lunas stone, a student of Hebrew points out a few “mistakes” according to him but never really expounds upon what exactly the mistake is except for the 5th commandment. When he is asked what it actually says he struggles trying to tell us what it Should say until the host of the video impatiently asks him again, specifically what it actually says. With this the student of Hebrew again struggles and says, it says Honor thy Father and thy Mother…. ABOVE!
When I heard this I knew that our understanding of the scriptures for near 2000 years is what is in error. At this time I would point out one other mistake which has existed for a very long time, the words are not Honor your, it is Glorify you. In other words, YOU glorify Father and Mother above. Why do men always suppose they know more about the ancient writings than those who wrote them? Since when would our Father instruct us to give glory to another man, before God? Does this not violate the 1st commandment? It is what it is…. Now the problem is, who is our Mother above, and did the ancients know her? Why don’t we? The reasons I have been given my whole life just make no sense, and I am sure that many will come to my rescue to save me from my fallen state and explain to me what the scripture “really mean.”
My friend and I talked about this for some time, the question was brought, if the scripture meant honor OR glorify thy earthly father and mother then we have a problem. Now my Father has also instructed me by way of commandment to forsake ALL evil, so, hypothetically speaking if my earthly father was a foul dishonest man, a thief, a murderer and oppressor of the poor and the week, and I did not honor him because of his evils, am I now guilty of the sin of Commandment #5? I don’t think so. And if I did Honor or Glorify him, in other words, worship him or give glory to him, am I now guilty of commandment #1? In looking at the meaning of the word Honor or Glorify among the many implicating words which describe it, is to Worship. Although this seemed very convincing, it wasn’t completed for me until I stumbled upon a couple of scriptures from the lips of Christ himself that I knew the ancient scribe who carved the Los Lunas Stone was not only authentic, but knew more about Paleo Hebrew and his scriptures than the so called experts of today.
In the following Jesus shows the Pharisees and scribes the error of their ways without telling them what it actually means. He shows them by their own understanding they contradict themselves but it is the fact that Jesus himself says in the following, God Commanded.
4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Interestingly enough the Greek translation for the above does not say Honor thy father and mother, it says, Be valuing THE Father and Mother. And again he says the same basic thing in Mark 7:10, the point being, what kind of God would condemn me to death for worshiping a false God, putting another God before him? What kind of God would put me to death for cursing an earthly father or mother whether I had reason or not? I know the answer, do you? This doesn’t sound like a God I want to worship.
God is a title, not a name, and my God encompasses my Father and Mother above and including my Lord and Savior. I have no doubt that My Father above wants me to Honor him, and glorify him as in worship, and my Mother in Heaven also who are among the only ones who are “Honorable” PERIOD. Are we here to give glory to our earthly parents?
The scribe who wrote the inscription of the Los Lunas Panel knew exactly what he wrote. Mistakes are made with pens and by the quick action of them, and lack of knowledge, the mistakes the scribe is accused of simply do not occur, do they mean for me to believe the scribe carved the entire row of characters chiseling away stepping back and blowing off the dust and then said OOPS?.. I don’t think so. However I could admit the scribe could have made one mistake in that he began to write the second part of the first commandment, or was it a mistake? And the scribe supposedly had to “Insert” the missing potion between the first and second line of the inscription? Hmmm, something stinks here…
It is said that the earliest known use of an insertion mark or caret is 1681, my question is, why didn’t anyone question the one found in 1681? Is its use in the Los Lunas stone evidence of the very earliest known use of the Caret? Evidence of a fraud, or evidence of someone in recent years attempting to change what an original inscription said because it did not fit their agenda or to render it a hoax and not understanding that the use of the Caret is likely a modern invention? Is it possible that “Thou Shalt have no other God before me” was added in at a modern date as it was not necessary to even be a part of the commandment as the commandment would have been complete without it. It is my opinion that the second line was added by someone in modern times, likely some Spaniard of the Catholic Faith who adhered to words of an altered Bible.
If you look close at the method of application of the glyphs there is a difference in style for a lack of better words, between the 2nd line and the rest of the panel, look closely at the Lamed symbol. In the entire panel all of the Lamed symbols either join at the point of the vertical and horizontal line, or a small gap is left BELOW the vertical line and ABOVE the horizontal. In the second line suspect of being added at a more modern date, the gap is not below the vertical line, but to the side in two of the three occurrences. This difference implies a different author. Now why would someone do this? Interestingly enough two of the mistakes mentioned would have been done by the author of the added line. Another interesting observance is, that some time in 2007, someone visited the site with a portable grinder and removed the first line, why only the first line? I hate to point this out to those responsible but isn’t this like tearing the pages from the scriptures so that it no longer applies? Regardless, it did not change a thing. One often meets their destiny on the road they take to avoid it.
It is my opinion due to common sense, if I approached a rock face with the intent to scribe something as important as the commandments and not knowing how exactly it was going to fit on the rock, I would not just sit down and start chiseling away. I would however plan what I was going to do and I would grab some charcoal from one of those nonexistent Hebrew debris piles, and lay the whole thing out first, then chisel the lines, do you think the scribe might have noticed mistakes if there were any? The following picture is what I truly believe the panel once looked like before someone got to it in the ancient past and took offense because it did not matched their altered Bible, or saw the threat of exposing a little plot; Manifest Destiny takes upon new meaning.
The Los Lunas Stone BEFORE anyone in the past got offended
I am Jehovah Elohim your God who has brought you out of the land of Egypt from the house of slaves. (1) You shall not make idols. (2) You shall not use the name Jehovah in vein. (3) Remember the day of the Sabbath and keep it Holy.
(4) Honor Father and Mother above that your days will be long on the earth that Jehovah Elohim your God has given you. (5) You must not murder, (6) you must not commit adultery, (7) you must not steal, (8) you must not give false testimony, (9) you must not covet your neighbors wife, nor that which he has.
Who would know more about the message inscribed on the stone? An ancient scribe or today’s so called experts? It is because of the things described previously that tells me this panel was inscribed some time prior to the creation of Catholicism or even possibly BC times. Was there a 10th Commandment? We may never know but from the perspective of those who inscribed the Los Lunas stone, there were 9, interestingly enough, according to those who inscribed the stone in the next chapter, there were only 9 as well.
It says what it says, and means what it means; it is what it is… It was because of the following chapter that caused me to reevaluate the Los Lunas Stone. The possibilities are many, but I guess no one is willing to look at the other possible perspectives. If there are mistakes in the Los Lunas inscription, it is from modern man, just my two cents. Continued in...
PART FOUR Puerco River Ark of the Covenant
Testimony of ARK by Various Idigenous tribes
From Adair’s “History of the American Indians” published in London 1775.
Found in the pages of Peruvian Antiquities by Mariano Eduardo de Rivero y Ustáriz translated to English in 1853 we find on pages 9-10,
But that which most tends to fortify the opinion as to the Hebrew origin of the American tribes, is a species of ark, seemingly like that of the Old Testament; this the Indians take with them to war ; it is never permitted to touch the ground, but, rests upon stones or pieces of wood, it being deemed sacrilegious and unlawful to open it or look into it. The American priests scrupulously guard their sanctuary, and the High Priest carries on his breast a white shell adorned with precious stones, which recalls the Urim of the Jewish High Priest : of whom we are also reminded by a band of white plumes on his forehead.
Whether this is the actual Ark or some species of Ark we cannot know at this time, but we can plainly see that they had knowledge of it. Could the following be another species of Ark? Speaking of the Algonquin tribes and those of the west we have; The History of Ancient America. George Jones 1843, pages 13-15
The Northern Aborigines have a traditional knowledge of the Deluge and the Dove of peace, which to them under the name of the medicine, or mystery bird, is sacred from the arrow of the hunter. They have their Ark of Covenant, in which is deposited some mystery, seen only by the priests of the Tribe,—it is said to be a shell, and supposed to give out oracular sounds; this is in analogy to the Book of the Laws placed in the Ark of Covenant by MOSES, preceding his death on Mount Nebo,—the oracular wisdom of which has guided civilization to this day. The ark is never suffered to touch the earth, but is always raised on a stand of wood or stone; it is invariably carried by a Tribe when they march to battle,—a similitude is here to JOSHUA at the siege of Jericho. When it is in their peaceful encampment, it is surrounded by twelve stones, indicative of the original number of the Tribes of their ancestors;—this is strictly in analogy with the twelve statues (probably rude blocks of stone) erected by MOSES around the Altar of the Covenant to personify the twelve tribes of Israel. JOSHUA, also, after the passage of the Jordan, erected twelve stones in his encampment at Gilgal, and the same number in the river at the place of the passage. They select their medicine men (i. e. priests or prophets) from among a portion of the tribe not warriors; here is the custom of the Levites, or descendants of AARON being in the sacred office of priesthood, for with the Israelites they were not to be taken from the ranks of the soldiery. These Aborigines dwell in booths, as when brought out of the land of Egypt, for they are still wanderers. [Lev. xxiii.] They offer a flesh, or burnt-offering from the chase, which is first cast into the flames, before even a starving family may eat. They have their corn and harvest feasts; also, one in observance of every new moon,—another in festivity of the first-fruits,—
and the great feast in direct analogy with the Hebrew Passover, even to the blood being stained upon the posts and lintels, and the mingling of the most bitter herbs! Then their fastings and purifications are practiced with the greatest severity. The breastplate, or ornament worn by their religious prophets, containing twelve shells, or stones of value, is in direct imitation of the ancient Pectoral worn by the Hebrew high priest, and which contained twelve precious stones, inscribed with the names of all the twelve original tribes of Israel. They have their cities of refuge, or huts of safety, where the most deadly foe dare not enter for his victim. They never violate a female captive, and upon the Hebrew principle, that their blood shall not be contaminated by interunion;—this has been strictly followed in all their wars with the Europeans. They also reject the savage practice of civilization upon the lofty principle of manly virtue!
It would seem that these people certainly had knowledge of the Ark, the way of the Israelites and all that pertained to them. How is it that these writers from the 1700’s and 1800’s seem to have had this information and it appears that today’s scholars don’t? I have never seen these quotes in modern books (with the exception of Dewey Farnsworth’s book).
From Hewett Edgar Lee’s book Chaco Canyon and its Monuments 1936
The Ark of the Covenant appears to have been known. On the excellent authority of Adair, Long and Noab, American Historians and ethnologists, we are informed that the western tribes of the North American Indians kept a holy chest, or ark, which they were wont to carry to the battle field when hard pressed by their enemies. Long says: This ark was placed on a sort of frame carried on men’s shoulders, and was not allowed to touch the ground. To uncover it was strictly forbidden. Three men who, were of curiosity attempted to examine its contents, were stuck blind on the spot.
Articles such as this were abundant in the early writings of this nation, it wasn’t until the formation of Smithsonian that scholars began to discredit the early writers and quit talking about the Ark along with the idea that a majority of the early writers who were WITH the Native people, mingled with them, spoke to them and made a record of their narratives were convinced and believed without a doubt that the Native American people were of Jewish decent. Today, the DNA research in and around the great lakes region and the Mississippi Valley, home of the mound builders, the Adena Culture and Hopewell Culture as the academics have named them, confirms this.
This is no longer a theory people, it is a known fact. Continued in....