A peculiar deity found in an apparently mithrAistic context at Modena. The deity has been interpreted as: 1. a Roman rendering of the para-Zoroastrian deity zurvan akArana. 2. Orphic protogonic deity Phanes/ Protogonos; 4. Chronos. 3. Zeus who swallowed the latter. The chronic
association of the deity -- thus identifying him with zurvan is seen in the form of the zodiac around him&the snake winding around him which represents the periodicity of time -- an element associated the Indo-Aryan chronic deity viShNu. However, the links to the protogonic deity
on the IndoAryan side are seen in the form of the two halves of the egg shells on which he is standing -- the hiraNyagarbha: e.g:
tad aNDam akarod dvaidhaM divaM bhuvam athApi cha |
tayoH shakalayor madhya AkAsham akarot prabhuH ||
We wonder if this iconography was directly
influenced by H contact. The H contact is also suggested for Platonic Chronos, the equvivalent of the Iranic Zurvan: 1 of the last Platonist before their destruction by the error of Nazareth, Damascius, states that Chronos is tricephalic with the heads of a lion, a bull & a god
We believe that this iconography was influenced by viShNu trayAtman, with the boar head being replaced by a bull head. This might have had some intersection with the depictions of a leontocephalic deity in syncretic Roman-Iranic mithrAistic contexts where the deity is depicted in
mithraeums with a single leonine head. The head of this deity might be compared with the central lion head on the torso of the Modena deity, where its flanked by a deer & ram heads. They also share the wings & the snake winding around them. Comparable leontocephalic deities have
been found at several mithraistic shrines though his identity remains unclear -- Zurvan, Chronos, Protogonos? In this context, we may also note that an Orphic fragment states that Phanes bulls as side heads & a mighty serpent appearing in the shapes of all kinds of animals upon
his head. We suspect this element of his iconography was again a transmission from a H source; probably vaiShNava.
Some snippets on the saMkarShana:
sahasra-shirasA vyaktaH svastikAmala-bhUShaNaH |
phaNA-maNi-sahasreNa yaH sa vidyotayan dishaH ||
... lA~NgalAsakta-hastAgro bibhran mushalam uttamam |
kalpAnte yasya vaktrebhyo viShAnala-shikhojjvalaH ||
saMkarShaNAtmako rudro niShkramyAtti jagat-trayam
sa bibhrachChikharI-bhUtam asheShaM kShiti-maNDalam ||
We posit, that the "Heliodoran" vaiShNava tradition was not a local
aberration but was transmitted further into the Greco-Iranian world & influenced the Orphic & the Platonic tradition dependent on it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
To expand: There are few points 1. Euro-American academia has a bit of a cult-like structure to it, i.e., there are certain beliefs that most of its practitioners don't challenge. For e.g., at the highest level the peer-review/journal publication/impact factor fetish. 2. Thus,
practices which are harmful to the field or simply unethical (sophisticated plagiarism & fake result production) are rampant. 3. The degree varies from field to field & has some correlation with how ethnically diverse it is. A field which is dominated by people of Western Euro
ancestry, with few non-Euro ancestry folks tends to be more susceptible for certain cult nostrums taking root. For e.g.,paleontology is predominantly peopled by such folk; thus, even though it is rather close to the foundations of biology, it is overrun by the fads of navyonmAda
A cosmogonic-theogony of the pA~ncharAtrika type interpreted from the sarga section of the brahma-purANa. While the account in the said text might be taken as a confused or corrupt account a theistic sAMkhyA, we believe that it has a genuine foundation. Most notable is the role
the place of sanatkumAra skanda in the emanation of the 7 rudra-s -- this ties to the ancient motif of 7 marut-s (known as rudra-s in the early shruti) with the paurANika number of the seven-fold marut-s. It might also reflect the symbiosis between early vaiShNava-s& kaumAra-s in
places like mathurA that we have presented earlier. Such cosmogonic theogonies are reminiscent of Greek Platonic reflexes of the same. While the arrangement of deities & their generations are different, the overall concept is rather comparable. In the nirIshvara presentations of
Archaeogenetics & other methods contribute to the understanding of the battles of Himera between Carthaginian & the Greeks. The 1st battle was won by the Greeks. The second under the lesser known 1st Hannibal decimated the Greeks for good. Hannibal then pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn…
made a human sacrifice of 3000 yavana-s & enslaved all their women. Probably some victims of his gruesome sacrifice were among those whose genomes were sequenced by the authors. At least 2 individual seem to be fighters from the steppes with East Asian admixture, like shaka-s
One of them has a potential Mongolic mito haplogroup leaving no doubt that these were likely shaka-s who had mixed with groups on the eastern steppe. It is also notable that there were Baltic groups in the war -- I wonder if these were actually the famous Thracian peltasts who
Reasonable review on the impact of Neanderthal introgression on modern sapiens. A big factor in the survival of N alleles is the selective pressure from infections. Interestingly, a study found that E.Asian came under strong selection from coronavirus(es) cell.com/current-biolog…
within the last 900 generations. Think about what the implication of that is for the so-called lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2. Interestingly, several genes that might play a role in viral immunity show introgressed Neanderthal variants. Interestingly, the chemokine receptor
CCR9 N variant has increased susceptibility for SARS-CoV-2 in places like the Indian subcontinent; see: manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2020/10/12/pan…
This suggests that in the past, the CCR9 N variant might have provided protection against some other virus that became a liability with Wuhan. On the
Someone asked what the earliest attestation of connection between garuDa and viShNu was; I think:
viShNave tvA shyenAya tvA somabhR^ite viShNave tvA | from yajurvedic texts.
There is another connection between the two seen in the paippalAda shruti which might be coeval too
In the maitrAyaNIya saMhitA the incantation of the two are juxtaposed. The first incantation describes the "ritual" form of garutmant:
suparNo .asi garutmAn trivR^itte shiro gAyatraM chakShur bR^ihadrathantare pakShau, stoma AtmA, ChandAMsy a~NgAni, yajUMShi nAma sAma te tanUr
Warning long thread that'll be part of future note:
It is rather important that H who are inclined toward a proper polytheistic philosophy study the yavana tradition closely. The first reason is simple: having a related phylum at some distance from our own provides a comparative
perspective that might clarify uncertain points because they might be augmented in it, or they help sharpen an ancestral signal that might not be otherwise discernable. The second reason is something H are more resistant to. Sometime in the late brāhmaṇa period the rise of the
Prājāpatya tradition meant a concomitant decline in the Aindra tradition that was more aligned with the ancestral form of the religion. This Prājāpatya “wobble” along with unanchored brahmavāda (i.e., philosophy of brahman that gets increasingly decoupled from the ancestral