Re: Annedoti, Anon (Re: A China-Sumer connection)

From: Martyn Harrison (nospam_at_spammers.of.the.world.unite)
Date: 03/03/05 

Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 14:38:45 GMT

Apparently on date Thu, 03 Mar 2005 22:44:13 +1300, benlizross
<benlizro@ihug.co.nz> said:

>Comm wrote:
>>
>> "benlizross" <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
>> news:42262606.539E@ihug.co.nz...
>>
>> >> They were also called Musarus and Oannes in Greek. Odacon is a name that
>> >> came up for ? a person back then. Sumerians state that "SOMEONE" came to
>> >> them from the sea and taught them what they knew. They didn't claim to
>> >> have invented it. They didn't claim their gods gave it to them. Logic
>> >> dictates that sea faring people taught them. WHO? Austronesians are a
>> >> very
>> >> good guess since they WERE sea faring people that would be likely to wear
>> >> fish costumes (totems).
>> >
>> > Really? Who could deny that the Austronesians were seafarers? But I'm
>> > not familiar with any of them wearing fish costumes. Still, there are a
>> > lot of different cultures, and maybe some of them do or did. I won't ask
>> > you to provide evidence of this, since I know it's against your
>> > principles. But if there is any, I'm sure Paul has dug it up by now.
>>
>> I don't have references on hand - and even if I found some by digging thru
>> heaps - it would not be in etext. Sure, PKM seems to know more than I
>> know - he has an idea WHO they were. He mentioned fish totems - ask him.
>> >
>> >> Yeah, Greeks talked about this stuff too, some claiming to have met these
>> >> people. Anyone can go read what Berossus had to say. Thales also spoke
>> >> about this.
>> >
>> > Again it would be wondeful to know which Greeks claimed to have met the
>> > fish-people, but I know you're not about to name names.
>>
>> Thales, for one I know for sure offhand.
>
>So what did he say? "I met Oannes"? "I met people with a human face and
>legs but a body like a fish?"

It wouldn't be too surprising to find Thales talking about fish-men.

AIUI he thought that mankind evolved from fish, earth evolved from water, etc.
Although, it must be said he specifically would have regarded fish-men as a
sort of stepping stone, in an evolutionary sense, between primitive fish and
advanced men (which is more or less correct.)

Equally well, Thales wasn't much into the concept of godlike beings - you could
say this was the reverse of his world-view.

I find it fascinating that the two men (and their cultural background) are so
very different. Thales is seeking a progressive explanation as to how mankind
has developed and changed and is advancing. He sees a sort of "missing link"
between fishes and men, suiting his agenda of everything ultimately forming
from the eternal, infinitely large oceans.

Berossus (apparently) has a non-progressive explanation where mankind is
settled and is simply keeping a traditional niche going. It all comes about
from godlike intervention, etc. Although, he might have been an
unrepresentative example of his culture, what with not actually living in
Babylon by then, etc.

Two very different interpretations as to how come water irrigates the crops so
well, I'd be thinking.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Annedoti, Anon (Re: A China-Sumer connection)
    ... It wouldn't be too surprising to find Thales talking about fish-men. ... AIUI he thought that mankind evolved from fish, earth evolved from water, etc. ... Thales is seeking a progressive explanation as to how mankind ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Annedoti, Anon (Re: A China-Sumer connection)
    ... It wouldn't be too surprising to find Thales talking about fish-men. ... AIUI he thought that mankind evolved from fish, earth evolved from water, etc. ... Thales is seeking a progressive explanation as to how mankind ...
    (sci.anthropology)