Sei sulla pagina 1di 113

The Nexus

Spoken Language:
The Link Between the Mayan and Semitic,
During Pre-Columbian Times
By David Allen Deal
ISAC PRESS Institute for The Study Of American Cultures
Non-profit Educational: 1004 Broadway Columbus, Georgia 31901 (706) 324-0201
All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval sysytem,
without written permission from the author or publisher with one exception:
One copy may be downloaded for personal use, not for sale or recopying.
copyright 1993
Library of Congress Catalogue No. 93-079736 ISBN 1- 880820-09-9
At the time of their first appearance, the Maya script and
astronomical and mathematical knowledge are fully developed,
and this presupposes a previous evolution of long duration
(of which nothing is known), unless there was some
cultural importation, which is hardly thinkable.
The Alphabet Volume 1, page 84
-- David Diringer, D.Lit (Flor), M.A. (Cantab.)
Who is this that darkens council
by words without knowledge?
-- Yahweh... Job 38:1
There is a principle which is a bar against all information,
which is proof against all arguments
and which cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance
-- that principle is contempt prior to investigation
-- Herbert Spencer
American anthropology has, as a dictum of law, since Major Powell was the director of the
Smithsonian's Bureau of Ethnology, refused to seriously investigate any site in the Americas, if
that site bore any evidence of precolumbian cultural intercourse, between the old and new
worlds. All such sites ( that bore evidence of cultural contacts ) continue to be viewed by the
American Academy of Anthropology as fraudulent.
This book is meant to demonstrate that Major Powell (war hero aside) was, if not a total
fool, at the least the singular, major and absolute stumblingblock to the advancement of pre-
columbian knowledge. Those of the American academy who blindly follow him in this provin-
cial, incredibly naive, extremely prejudical opinion are indeed best classified in the former cate-
gory, and articulate the quintessence of mean-spirited arrogance.
Those, on the other hand, whoe merely parrot what they have been taught by the academic
community, are to be pitied.
-- David Allen Deal
The Call of the Truth
They have cradled you in custom,
they have primed you with their preaching,
They have soaked you in convention
through and through;
They have put you in a showcase;
youre a credit to their teaching --
But cant you hear the Truth?
its calling you...
deepest appologies to ROBERT SERVICE, poet, and his
Call of the Wild
MAYAN: Quich, The Hidden Language............................................1
Parallel Histories...............................................................................7
Mayan Exodus Account..................................................................10
Kukulcn Hero of the Mayan Histories ...........................................22
The Mayan Battle of Jericho in the Popol Vuh.................................30
Mayan Satan ..................................................................................35
Chiwim-Tuln ................................................................................43
Giant Caves in Palestine .................................................................48
Mayan Numerologists .................................................................... 51
Quetzalcoatl, The Feathered Serpent ..............................................55
Linguistics of the Conquest of Mexico.............................................72
The Battle of Quetzaltenengo..........................................................76
More Mayan ...................................................................................80
Legends of Quetzalcoatl ................................................................ 88
Mesoamerican Word List................................................................92
Toltec Word List..............................................................................94
Mayan and Phoenician Infanticide .................................................97
How was America Named?......................................................... ...98
The Phoenician Discovery of the Americas.....................................99
Hopi legends.................................................................................100
Example of letter that has incorrect word breaks..........................104
References ....................................................................................106
Cyrus H. Gordon
David Deals professional background is quite different from mine. He is an artist who
shares with me an interest in the Mayans. I am a philogian who has specialized for over half
a century in Northwest Semitic dialects such as Hebrew, Phoenician, Aramaic, and Ugartic.
Both of us welcome new facts and new approaches. We gladly learn from each other and
from anyone else who can enlighten us.
Around 1550 A.D., an educated Mayan, familiar with Spanish as well as Mayan, composed
in the Mayan language, but in the Spanish (Latin) alphabet, an account of the Mayan past
( including mythological origins ), and future prospects. In stages this account was translated
into Spanish and then into English. It is called the Popol Vuh.
I pointed out in Before Columbus that the content of the Popol Vuh is derived from the
same Ancient Near East as the Old Testament. My observation was buried in silence by the
establishment. As far as I know, Deal is the first writer to accept it and build upon it. He is, to
the best of my knowledge, the very first to maintain that not only the content but also the
language of the Popol Vuh is derived from the Semitic Near East. I am favorably disposed to
this view. ( It is interesting to note in this connection that Minoan Linear A is Northwest
I find Deals readings ( especially the Hebrew ones ) very hard to follow, though they are
often stimulating. Part of the trouble is that Deal does not use the terminology of professional
Hebraists and Semiticists. With some extra effort and collaboration, this could have made his
contribution more widely intelligible, without compromising substance or principle.
A small-minded reviewer could easily becloud the importance of Deals contributions by
harping on real or supposed errors. I chose rather to show how his work is leading us for-
We are not sure that Deals rendering of Baalam Akab in the Popol Vuh as meaning the
(two) [sic] lords of Jacob will prove to be correct, but it is, like many of the readings,
thought provoking.
The great leap forward that Deal has made possible is in his Discovery of Ancient America.
On Two occasions, while serving as Visiting Professor at the University of New Mexico, in
Albuquerque, I made trips to Los Lunas (Located about thirty miles southwest of
Albuquerque) to see the inscribed rock there. The text is an abridged version of the Ten
Commandments in the old Phoenician Hebrew letter-forms. No one has put any thought on
the fact that Samaritans have never given up that script and use a variety of it to this day.
The Los Lunas inscribed rock seemed to be out in the open without any special connection
with the general entourage. It was Deal who saw that the rock actually marks the entrance to
a gully that lead to the top of a fortified hill-site. On the crest was found a short inscription
( In the same script as the Ten-Commandment stone) reading YHWH LHYNW Yahweh (is)
our God [mighty one] in biblical Hebrew which is the same language ( though in different
letter-forms ) for the Samaritans and the Jews. Deal charted the entire site which has led to a
surprising result.
On a number of occasions during the last seven years, I have described the Ten-
Commandment stone to my wife Connie: ( who has a PhD. in Ancient Near East Studies and
has published technical studies under the name of Constance Wallace Gordon). Then, on the
weekend of March 20 and 21, 1993, we visited the Israeli Archeology Museum in Jerusalem.
There Connie spotted two stone slabs inscribed with the Ten Commandments in Samaritan.
She called me over and asked it those slabs might have some bearing on the Los Lunas Rock.
The labels informed us that instead of the Jewish mezuzot affixed to doorways to ward off
evil forces, the Samaritans employ Ten Commandments stones. One of the stones at the
museum was found at Sechem (= Nabulus) and dates from the third or fourth century A.D.;
the other was found at Tel Bilu ( near Rehovot, south of Tel Aviv)
and dates form the sixth or seventh century A.D.
The question arises as to what route the carriers of Samaritan culture took to reach Los
Lunas. The latter site is near the Rio Puercos, a tributary of the Rio Grande. This suggests
that the route from Palestine was through the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, then into the
gulf of Mexico, up the Rio Grande, and finally up the Rio Puercos to Los Lunas (Hidden
Mountain). Such scenarios can be discussed endlessly, but the fact remains that the
Samaritan Ten-Commandment stone is there. Its date might well be Byzantine. The site
should be excavated thoroughly. Quite possibly it would yield organic materials for a Carbon
14 test.
We are not dealing with a modern forgery. It has been there as far back as the local inhab-
itants ( Indian as well as white) know. The whites have witnessed it since about 1800. The
Indians call the place, The cliff of the strange writings.
But to get back to Deals Nexus, one of his most exciting suggestions is that the name
Maya(n) has to do with a large numeral because the Mayans were numerologists. What
has occurred to me is that the largest known number in any ancient Semeitc language, so far,
is the word for 100,000 attested to, as of now, only in Ebalite (ca. twenty-third century
B.C.). It is phonetically similar to the numeral with which Deal is operating. Semantically, a
case can also be made, for biblical Hebrew, the largest numbers ( to wit, thousand and
Myriad) are used to designate groups of people. All this has to be checked out carefully
before any worthwhile conclusions can be drawn. I am working on it and intend to publish in
and appropriate philological publication. Deals ideas are not to be swept under the rug or
killed by sterile silence.
All of us should bear in mind the words of Herbert Spencer, cited by Deal, Contempt prior
to investigation...cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance.
- Cyrus H. Gordon
The Hidden Language
The purpose of this book is to demonstrate that the ancient Quich-Mayan language of the
conquest era, has been identified, by this author, as having its roots in the middle eastern,
Semitic (Shemitic) tongue. This identification comes from stories, words and phrases found in
the famous Book of the community: Popol Vuh The Sacred Book of the Ancient Maya, the
Titulo Coyi, Annals of the Cakchicquels, and the Titulo de lo Seores de Totonicapan, as well as
other Mayan-related archaeological works, such as those of J.E.S. Thompson, Silvanus
Griswold Morley, Adrin Recinos, Robert Carmack and others.
The Mayan cosmological and historical book of the community, the Popol Vuh was first
transliterated from traditional, oral Quich-Mayan (creolized-Semitic) into archaic Spanish
phonetics by a Maya native in the 16th century. He had learned the Spanish phonetics and
alphabet, and completed the history up to about 1550 A.D. One hundred fifty years later it was
discovered, in his parish of Chichicastenango, by Catholic priest Francisco Ximnez who then
spoke Quich-Mayan. Ximnez translated it from Mayan (Spanish phonetics) to Spanish
meanings for the world to read. Later, in 1947, it was published and newly translated by
Adrin Recinos, then translated from Spanish to English by Delia Goetz and Silvanus Griswold
Morley. Finally, portions of it now have been transliterated, back, from both English and
Spanish, to Shemetic-Hebrew, via the original Mayan text (Spanish phonetics), in this work. It
seems confusing, but is very simple in execution. One need, however, be somewhat familiar
with biblical Hebrew and its narratives. By merely reading the Mayan stories and comparing
Hebrew words with the Quich-Mayan sounds and meanings, the results are not only
astounding, but, by utilizing the premise in this work, become very predictable.
This linguistic route seems a circuitous one; however, it is truly simple. The sound vs.
meaning rule of modern linguists must still be firmly applied. It also must be remembered
that the first Mayan transliterators were not philologists nor professional linguists, and as a
result, many close, but imperfect sounds emerged from their transliterations. Some meanings
have been reversed, and in the course of centuries some meanings have mutated or evolved,
as in the case of balam, meaning, jaguar when in the Mayan text it is clear that it original-
ly meant forefather lords (ie. Balam Akab). In the Shemetic baalym Akab means,
Lords of Yacob. Archaic Spanish phonetics, some of which are not even used in Spanish at
this day, have also led to great misunderstanding and confusion among modern linguists.
Of course, most of the present fifteen dialectic variants of the Mayan speaking peoples is
different from and, seemingly, not at all connected to Semitic ( Shemetic ), or even Quich.
What this exercise is about then, is to relate the original language and place names of the
ancient Quich-Maya, with - to quote Francisco Ximnez -
about the principal language of the world ( ie. Shemetic/Akkadian /Aramaic / Hebrew ).
There is enough left of the old tongue to make the case, even at this late date.
It must be noted that during the Spanish conquest, in the year 1696, in the province of
Peten, to the south of Yucatan, during the Spaniards expedition against the Itz, Ximnez
reports that they found some books written with characters resembling Hebrew characters
and also those used by the Chinese (Historia de la Provincia de Chiapa y Guatemala, I, 4.).
These were not merely Mayan Hieroglyphs, which would have been well known to the
Spaniards. Ximnez was a Catholic scholar who was in a position to know, precisely how
Hebrew characters looked. Ximnez statement indicates that the Maya probably did use the
old Phoenician alphabet for a time, after arriving in the paleo-Americas.
We, modern students of the ancient Maya, must not fall into obedient or slavish belief in
the professionals false, prejudicial argument, typified by a letter written to me by Dennis
Tedlock, James H. Mcnulty professor at University at Buffalo SUNY: Teadlock writes:
...I can tell you...Historical Linguists begin by acquiring a knowledge of several
neighboring languages and then work their way carefully farther afield, showing
respect for the autonomy of a given language and the authentic history of its speak-
ers; to suddenly jump far away would be to say, your local history and traditions
dont matter; what matters is the world across the Atlantic, where my people came
There are several fallacies in this thinking. First, the term authentic history begs the
question of the authenticity. Who determines the authenticty of a certain history or myth? Is
it the anthropological establishment? Do facts not supercede authoritative pontifications?
The interpretation of even ones own history can become somewhat mythologized with time.
The myth of young George Washington and the cherry tree is an example. Modern histori-
ans do not believe that this famous event really occurred. Paul Bunyan, Johnny Appleseed,
John Henry and La Llorona del rio are several other famous American myths. Some of
these stories may have had a germ of truth in them, but by now, have been overcome by
The possibility that these New World languages at question were derived from earlier Old
World tongues is flatly ignored, without being given even the slightest consideration by the
experts. This is an illogical, and extremely prejudiced view. Secondly, since we know that
our world civilization actually generated in the Old World, and that far too many cultural
similarities exist between these divergent (western vs. eastern hemisphere) branches of the
human family for us to believe that the new world indigenes re-invented them all.
One must ask a question of the anthropologists. Why do you, as a group, fight so hard
against any valid discovery or evidence of Old/New World connections, whether by amateur
or professional? Logic dictates that there must be an underlying reason for this prejudice.
Was it all recreated by independent invention? This is your theory after all. Do you really
expect us to believe that? The reason, of course, is a philosophical / evolutionary one. We
shall not dwell on it here, however, it controls the halls of academia in America.
To quote another of the outspoken adversaries of diffusionism (ancient New/Old World
maritime connections) from an article in Biblical Archeologist Summer 1979, Marshall
McKusik, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Iowa, writes:
...Proof of Phoenician influence should include the presence of the following items of
shared cultural inventory: Phoenician loan words in Indian languages and, of course,
some indian words in Phoenician; alphabetic writing; parallels in architecture, sculp-
ture, and art; surviving oral traditions and mythological accounts of the bringing of
civilization; farming technology; the use of iron; Phoenician artifacts and pottery, ship
construction and navigation; Mediterranean food plants and animals; and derivations
of Canaanite religious ritual and cosmology...If such proofs exist, why do scholars
reject it?
In each of these cases, evidence does exist. The question is well put, Why, indeed, do
scholars reject it?
Some of the items listed by McKusick are illogical: loan words would be unidentifiable IF
the main languages were from the same source, but altered by millenia of separation, or
even broken differently by modern transliterators. IF they were totally different languages,
as he assumes, McKusick would be able to identify an ancient Indian word in the ancient
Phoenician tongue, true, however, though much of the Phoenician language is known, cer-
tainly not all is known. Adding to the problem of recognition, apparently, very little of the
original Quich-Mayan language appears to have come through the vicissitudes of time and
normal linguistic alteration unscathed, that is as far as modern Mayan dialects are con-
cerned. But with the ancient Mayan documents; that is a different situation. There is much
more than simply a few loan words. There is the entire, conquest-period, Quich-Mayan
language to draw from. The problem has been such, that no one in academia has bothered
to make the comparison before, because it is impossible by their biased theory.
Regardless of academic arrogance and ignorance, this work will list hundreds of positive-
ly connected Shemetic/Mayan words and phrases. Even so, it barely scrapes the surface. As
a point of reference, ancient Phoenician and Hebrew were very nearly identical languages.
Both were north Semitic, and were written in almost the exact manner. With the exception
of some dissimilar words as in English spoken in England, compared to English from
America, the languages were identical. Therefore, Hebrew lexicons work well to decipher
this Mayan linguistic puzzle. Hebrew is especially useful because there is a vast body of
written work, to make reference to, and a great historical heritage to check it against. As far
as parallels in architecture: only a blind man could not see the similarities in pyramid archi-
tecture, corbelled vaults and doorways and basic construction techniques. These similarities
even extend eastward to the sacred Khmer wat temples in Cambodia.
Alphabetic writing has been found and identified in hundreds of locations throughout the
Americas. When confronted with this evidence, however, most anthropologists balk and
claim fraud; examples are numerous: Bat Creek Stone; Newark Ohio Decalog and other
Hebrew writing. Braxton Tablet; Grave Creek Stone; Monnegan Island inscription;
Kensington Rune Stone; Hidden Mountain, New Mexico; Michigan Artifacts (thousands of
engraved tablets) with writing, some in Hebrew and some in Egyptian hieroglyphs; Parayiba
Text; Celtic ogham writing, found all over the Americas. The list is numerous and cannot
be completely cited here for the sake of brevity, but, most of the major ones are noted.
Indian spear and arrow point technology is first found in the Old World as evidenced by
many sites, such as the battlefield near Gilgal where Israelite, general Joshua asked the sun to
remain in the heavens, and it did so as the result of a planetary roll over. ( Discovery of Ancient
America , Deal, pp 124-126 - The Day Behemoth & Leviathan, Died , Deal 1999 ).
Mythological and cosmological accounts and religious ritual are all demonstrable. The
Popol Vuh and its similarity to the biblical accounts is prima facie evidence. The Canaanite
practice of infanticide, shunned by all other cultures of the Mediterranean during the classical
Greek period, is clearly represented in the Americas. Worship of the sun god Baal, (Bel) of the
Canaanites is prevalent in the Americas even to this day. The Canaanite concept of the sun
going into the earth for the night and out of the subterranean world in the morning is evi-
denced in the Mexican/Spanish: entrada del sol (entering of the sun - nightfall), and salida
del sol (leaving of the sun - morning), exactly the opposite of European or so called western
thinking, wherein the sun appears to come out for the day and go away at night.
The American anthropological establishment most assuredly has an axe to grind. That
axe is, clearly, their pre-conceived, dogmatically held hypothesis that early peoples in the
Americas, all, had supposedly migrated across the polar regions during the last Ice Age.
This false idea, which they sell on every street corner, has severely impaired their ability to
objectively view the true evidence when it appears.
Add to this, the fact, that American antiquarians, anthropologists, and archeologists, as
typified by McKusik, never expected to find Old World languages here in the New World,
and were insufficiently trained and poorly suited to recognize them, when and if encoun-
tered. The added baggage of prejudice against such finds further ill-suits them for fair
investigation. So the search for evidence has been thrust into the hands of the non-profes-
sional (not un-professional), amateurs. It is well to remember that Heinrich Schleimann of
Troys discovery, Thomas Young and Jean Francois Champollion the code breakers of the
Rosetta Stone and Thomas Edison, inventor of the electric light, all fit into that category. Of
course, the fact that the establishment very nearly always comes down firmly on the side
of the old versus the new, is nowhere better typified than in the case of Nicolas
Copernicus who foolishly published the Heretical concept that the sun, rather than the
earth was the center of our planetary system. They nearly killed him for his non-establish-
ment, unconventional ideas.
One-by-one, the old, untenable, dogmatic arguments posited more than a century-and-a-
half ago by the American antiquarians: that there had been NO contacts, cultural or other-
wise, between ancient Meso-American and Old World peoples have been dispelled. At one
time they claimed, as proof of their concept, that the wheel was unknown here in the
Americas. This fallacy has been disproven, for example, by the wheeled toys found at infan-
ticide burial sites in central Mexico. The only remaining, dogmatically held belief of the
anthropological and archeological communities has been, that there were NO ancient lin-
guistic ties between the Old World and the new. Had there been such an unwanted, ancient
linguistic nexus, their entire premise would collapse, not just the linguistic argument, but
the evolutionary one as well. The only approved explanation, therefore, for the presence of
any people in the Americas became the hypothetical, Asian Land Bridge theory. This had
been the only source of migration for these ancient people, they reasoned. They cite inde-
pendent invention as the mechanism for the astounding mass, consisting of hundreds of
cultural and technological similarities between ancient, Middle-eastern peoples and the
Meso-American Indians. - The Possibility of Near Eastern - Mesoamerican Culture
Contact, Sorenson, John L., 1967.
Aside from the mathematical impossibility of so much coincidence, the written and
spoken traditional, historical records of these past, great civilizations has been generally
regarded as mythical nonsense, to be casually discounted by the majority of these same,
modern experts, in favor of their system of twiddling pieces of broken pottery. The ancient
Mayan records claim that they came from across the sea, from the direction of the rising
sun. This, of course, implies that the ancient Maya were in possession of naval expertise
and navigational arts. The greater implications of anthropological morphology behind acade-
mias sophistic, evolutionary reasoning will not be discussed here, though it is certainly dis-
cernable, we will content ourselves with the linguistic facts alone.
The basic premise of this work is; that although the Maya were not a Semitic (Shemitic)
people, but rather a Hametic ( kHametic ) one, they spoke a Shemetic language, because
their progenitors, the Carthaginian/Phoenicians did so. The Quich-Maya are the direct
descendants of the Hivites :: ( kHwym ). That they are the same family, read the discus-
sion of Carthaginian naval power and of the many cultural similarities between the Maya
and the Phoenician/Carthaginians in Discovery of Ancient America. ( D.A.A. ) The fact that
the ancient Quich-Maya assimilated the historic record of their white-faced, Sacorowach,
Tolteca/Hebrew overlords which record is identical to the Hebrew Biblical account is
abundantly clear from their histories. The reason for their flight to the new world is dis-
cussed in D.A.A. More importantly, proof of the ancient Shemetic linguistic connection is
first demonstrated there.
The following word list and re-translation is to be incorporated with the linguistic work
and the basic premise of a Shemetic linguistic background for the Quich-Mayans, estab-
lished in: D.A.A. According to the Maya, this entire migration account occurred on the other
side of the Atlantic Ocean. Mayanologists think that the Mayan histories took place on this
side of the Ocean, because they, quite arrogantly, deny the internal data claimed to be true,
within the histories themselves. So little credence is paid to the Mayan account, by the
archeological / historical / anthropological academy that the very places of its ancient occur-
rences which are precisely those of the biblical, stories the other side of the sea,
have been transplanted, by these modern historical theorists to Guatemala, on this side of
the Atlantic, rather than properly in the eastern Mediterranean. They apparently do not read
very well, nor care to believe the ancient testimony.
The Mayan account, of course, begins with the creation of the world, the subsequent
flood and quickly becomes involved with the famous histories of the Mayan forefathers.
The majority of the Popol Vuhs history, takes place after the division of the sea, which is
immediately followed by the migration of the tribes on dry footing, through the sea-bed, to
the other side. CHOLOCHIC-ABAH, BOCO TAHINAC-ZANAIEB - Popol Vuh p. 183.
The sea parted, they walked across dryshod......etc. The famous land of Tuln was entered
from the southwest across a sea, then, after a period of forty years wandering across deserts,
under the leadership of Kukulcn, the fabled land of Tuln was conquered. It was occupied
for a period of time and was ultimately left behind in the east, across the Atlantic Ocean. The
sea which parted was not the Atlantic, this is obvious from the internal data. Please read
the Parallel stories, starting on page 7, then compare the entire story in sequence, it is the
biblical account of the Exodus. The sea that was crossed, on foot, was the very shallow,
extreme northern five miles of the Gulf of Suez known anciently as the "Suph Sea," a part of
the greater Red Sea (not the modern "Sea of Reeds" a name applied to the ancient Mara or
bitter lakes north of Etham) as is popularly supposed. This idea is based on the similarity
between the English words "red" and "reed." This happy, coincidental similarity does not work
in Hebrew, the original language of the text, although suph and sooph are similar, the
ancient name was mara not sooph Therefore, it is an invalid, skeptical, attempt to dis-
credit the story by moving it to a less "miraculous" marsh location.
The new linguistic evidence presented here, shall shatter the single remaining, establish-
ment opposition to, what they call diffusionism. This term is loosely defined as; the trans-
oceanic arrival by foreign peoples, in nuclear North and South America, during ancient
times, which established the Meso-American civilizations and others on these continents,
through maritime expertise. This, of course is, in opposition to their favored theoretical,
polar migration route which is posited to have occurred at some undisclosed ancient time,
most likely many thouusands of years before present regardless of compelling evidence to
the contrary.
This work shall demonstrate, direct cultural, historic and ancestral (genetic) linkage,
between ancient Meso-American and Middle-eastern peoples. The entire structure of ancient
history of the Americas then, has been a falsehood up to this point, and must be rewritten,
by qualified, unbiased investigators who are willing to actually take into account the writ-
ten, historical record of peoples such as the Maya.
Accounting for these ancient, Meso-American high civilizations by a speculative theory of
polar wandering, as the establishment has done, and then rigidly holding to this doctrine,
the archaeologists, historians, and anthropologists have thus denied the actual written his-
tories, left to us by these famous people. Their highly questionable and improbable land
bridge theory which was proposed several hundred years ago, actually flies in the face of
the testimony of the ancient "Americans" themselves. The Maya, in particular, claimed to
have arrived from the east, from "Tuln," from the direction of the rising sun, across the
ocean (obviously trans-Atlantic). Their stories are the same as the Hebrew stories, which
need to be examined with a critical eye, rather than simply dispensing with the idea, by
claiming it must be the work of the conquest-era Jesuit missionaries. The Mayan historical
linguists are certainly modern myth-makers since they have done this very thing.
More importantly, the respective idioms of the ancient Maya and the ancient
Phoenicians, as well as that of the ancient Hebrews, were in most respects virtually identi-
cal. The Kanaanite, Maya truly spoke Shemetic.
It only remains to view the linguistic evidence. Once examined, it logically follows that
history must be re-written, and some prevalent, but bad ideas tossed out.
Parallel Histories
Mayan Account:
The Popol Vuh contains a creation story which depicts the earth as having existed,
before man, covered with water for a period, then is later flooded to destroy the first men.
In other words the earth had in its history two distinct floods separated by a time during
which man lived on the planet.
Before the world was created, Calm and Silence were the great kings that ruled.
Nothing existed, there was nothing. Things had not yet been drawn together. The face of
the earth was unseen. There was only motionless sea, and a great emptyness of sky.
There were no men anywhere, or animals, no birds or fish, no crabs. Trees, stones,
caves, grass forest, none of these existed yet. There was nothing that could tremble, or
cry in the air. Flatness and emptyness, only the sea, alone and breathless. It was night.
Silence stood in the dark. - Popol Vuh
Israelite Account:
The Genesis account also states the the earth was covered with water before the world
of man and animals was created. It also states that the face of the deep (waters) were cov-
ered with darkness, called night. Dry land does not appear in the Genesis account until
verse 9 of Genesis 1. Therefore, it is a truism that the Genesis story of the Bible begins
with a flood, as does the Mayan account, and is later followed by a worldwide flood that
destroys mankind, as does the Mayan account. - Genesis 1:1ff
The fact that the Bible discusses two worldwide floods in Genesis is rarely discussed
among religionists, and is poorly understood because of the superimposition of religious
dogma. This story is presented merely to demonstrate a similarity in cosmological concept,
not linguistics and irrespective of religious interpretation and dogmatism.
Mayan Account:
The Quich Maya list, in most of the titulos and the Popol Vuh, an ancestor, called
Balam Akab, whose people lived in the East, across the sea (ocean) in a land called Tuln
- Quechean Civilization, Carmack p. 287. These ancestors of the Quich-Maya were
white - bid p. 307. They claimed to be a people of two lordships, one people - two lord-
ships, whose ancestors had come from a region of seven caves. They listed these forefathers
with the title Balam, which appropriately, in Hebrew, means lords ( ie. baalym ).
Israelite Account:
The Bible has it that the forefather of the people of Israel and Judah, one people, two
lordships, was a man called Jacob (Yakab), later surnamed Israel. His name is based on
the Hebrew prime root; akab, meaning to supplant, as he was to supplant his elder
brother Esau. Were you an Israelite of his time, you could have referred to him as baal
Yakab (lord Jacob). If you were referring to his immediate family or his successors, you
might have said; baalym yakab (Lords of Jacob). To carry this idea a bit further, had
you followed the common Hebrew practice of dropping the first vowel of names (Ytsaak =
Saak, Abraham = Braham, Yakab = Akab), you would have vocalized: Baalym Akab,
which, as you can see, is the name of the Maya forefather, patriarch of Popol Vuh fame.
Mayan Account:
The "Main, kin based political unit was whitefaced as a quail and was called
Sacorowach. In other places simply, sac, meant white. This reference is found in
the Mayan document entitled - Titulo Coyoi - Quechean Civilization, Carmack, p. 307.
Sak Beh the Mayan Milky Way. - The Code of Kings, Scheele pp 109-113
~. ( tsakor ) brilliant whiteness ( 6713)
:~ (ruach) spirit entity life breath (7307)
,,.( ytssak ) Isaack saccae = saxons ( 6713)
:: ( bow ) way ( 935 )
Israelite Account:
In many ways we may see that the original AMURU (Amorite) people of Palestine or
Retenu, as the Egyptians pictured them, were white skinned "Caucasian type. The bust
of Herod Agrippa, an Edomite/Israelite (both Hebrew) may be seen to represent the type
(Discovery of Ancient America, page. 91 & page 54 of this book ). Macedonians, in gen-
eral, as typified by Alexander the Great were Edomites. This may be seen from the
Septuagint (LXX) version of Ester, wherein Haman the Agagite in the Masoretic Hebrew
text (Agag, had been an earlier Amalakite/Edomite king of great fame mentioned in the
Bible,- I Samuel 15), is called Haman the Macedonian, equating the term Macedonian
with Agagite (Edomite). There are many representations of Alexander showing him to be
a golden-haired man, of the so-called Caucasian family, demonstrating again the racial type
of the Israelites who were cousin Hebrews to the Agagites of the Edomites (even though
the two families were perpetual enemies). Thereby the Mayan meaning of white-faced
for the Quich Mayan word sac, is not only linguistically derived from a Shemetic word
root for "white," but also from a definition given to the white-faced, Tolteca rulers of the
Maya, whose original tribal name was "Saac" or Isaac , the actual name of the "lost"
Israelites, from which is also derived the appellation: Saxsones, Saca-suni, and Saxons.
Mayan Account:
The Popol Vuh states that Baalam Quitz , upon having a presentiment of his death, left
the symbol of his being. It was a bundle called the "Pisom Cacal" or, "Pizom-Gagal."
We are going to return, we have completed our mission (here) our days are ended,
think, then of us, do not erase us (from your memory) nor forget us. You shall see your
homes and your mountains again; settle there, and so let it be. Go your way and you
shall see again the place from which we came. These words they said when they bade
them farewell, then Baalam Quitz left the symbol of his being, the Pizom-Gagal
(Pisom Cacal) never did they unwrap it, but it was always wrapped, and with them.
Bundle of Greatness they called it. They remembered their fathers, great was the glory
of the bundle to them. - Popol Vuh p. 205.
He told his people to keep it with them, that they should return again to the land from
which they came. Later in a destination city, they unwrapped it. - Popol Vuh p. 205 ftnt. 3.
Israelite Account:
"And Joseph said to his brothers, I am about to die (presentiment); but the elohym
(mighty ones) will visit you and bring you up out of this land to the land which he
swore to Abraham, to Isaac and to Yacob' (the land from which they came). Then
Joseph took an oath to the sons of Israel, saying, Elohym will visit you, and you shall
carry my bones up from here. So Joseph died, being a hundred and ten years old; and
they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.
- Genesis 50:22ff.
Though the position of this story is out of sequence, with reference to the Bible, as is
much of the Quich-Mayan history, all of the biblical elements are present in the Popol
Vuh. We now examine this Mayan bundle of greatness, the famous Pisom Cacal or,
Pizom Gagal. If indeed this story is that of the Exodus, then the portion of the Mayan
story which deals with the Pisom C acal, must fit into the Hebrew Exodus story regard-
less of chronological order.
Mayan Account: PISOM C'AC'AL
Balam Quitz left this symbol of his being, the bundle of greatness upon his death.
It remained wrapped until a destination city in Hacavitz-Chipal [Chichn Itz].
Mayanologists are unable to say more about this mysterious package except that: it was
a tradition to wrap sticks in the MANTLES of dead gods.
- Popol Vuh 1977, Page 205.
Pisom-Cacal, - Titulo Coy'i, Carmac, p. 288, Pizom Gagal, - Popol Vuh, p. 205,
Kakal, ( opcit, Carmack, p. 322 ).
:c (pas) long sleeved tunic of diverse colors (6446)
(Josephs mantle, representing...)
:. (am) tribe, people (5971)
: (ka) hitherto, beforetimes (3542)
:. (ga -al) free (1351)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :. : :. :c
Phonetic: pasam ka ga-al
Israelite Account:
This bundle was nothing other than Josephs bones wrapped in his coat of many colors,
the very coat made for him by his father Yacob-Israel in Genesis 37:3. In this biblical verse
the word Pasym (6446) is used in reference to that same multi-colored tunic. Several
hundreds of years later, Moses took the bones of Joseph and carried them out of Egypt with
the Israelites in Exodus ( Exodus 13:19). The facts of both stories align.
To further enhance the connection and importance of the symbolic removal of Josephs
bones from Egypt into the promised land at a future, predetermined time, we have the tes-
timony of Josepheus, a Jewish historian of the 1st century;
At length his brethren died, after they had lived happily in Egypt. Now the posteri-
ty and the sons of these men, after some time, carried their bodies, and buried them
at Hebron: but as to the bones of Joseph, they carried them into the land of Canaan
afterward when the Hebrews went out of Egypt.
- Josepheus, Antiquities. Bk. II, ch. VIII, v. 2
It is quite reasonable to assume that Josephs body, after embalming, was finally wrapped
in his famous coat, the Pasam kh gal.
The Mayan "Exodus" Account:
The majority of the elements of the biblical Exodus story appear in the Popol Vuh and
other Mayan documents. This fact suprises no knowledgeable person acquainted with these
Mayan writings. Although it is a popular belief among Maya archeologists and historians,
these biblical elements found in the Mayan documents were not included by the hand of
Jesuit missionaries by any stretch of the imagination. The overwhelming mass of Shemetic
cognates, as we shall demonstrate in this work, that exists in the Quich-Mayan tongue is
the factor which precludes this old archeologists fable.
The dryshod crossing of the sea -- after having been parted by Balam Quitz /Kukulcn
as stated in the Maya history -- is, obviously familiar and parallel with, that of the Mosaic
book of Exodus in the Bible. What is most enlightening to the student of these histories
(particularly in view of the dim light of academic bias against such knowledge), is that the
Mayan account is written (rather transliterated) in absolutely recognizable, though some-
what creolized, Hebrew/Shemetic, for those willing to understand. To quote it directly:
From the Popol Vuh, Sacred Book of the Quich-Maya, Translated by Adrin Recinos to
They crossed the if there were no sea; they crossed on stones, placed in a row
over the sand. For this reason they were called Stones in a Row, Sand Under the Sea, (6)
names given to them when they [the tribes] crossed the sea, the waters having parted
when they crossed...
(6) Cholochic - Abah , Boco tahinac -Zanaieb, - Popol Vuh, 1983 p. 183. & ftnt. 6.
:, (ka-lak) divide, Smooth as stones (2520,2505-13) (also) (7971,7994)
(ak) surely (389)
: (aw-ba) willingly (became) (14)
.,: (bo-ko) opened (1234)
:: (teh-home) sea (8415)
(ak) surely (389)
::. (tzeh-on) migrated (6629)
: (ab) father (2)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :.. :: .,: : ,:
Phonetic: kalak- ak aw- bah bo-ko teh-hom-ak tzeh-on- ab
Meaning: SURELY (the) SEA DIVIDED [becoming smooth as stones to walk upon], IT
The Mayan history of the seas opening and the tribes passage, crossing on dry sand
and stones is told in recognizable Hebrew. The smooth as stones is a subtle nuance of
the Shemetic language - a double entendre - that is not needed to convey the story. This
grammatical nuance is contained in one word, Chalaq, (Chalach in Mayan) which has a
primary meaning to divide. It is enlightening, however in view of this linguistic nuance,
which mentions the sand and stones, because, this is just the type of data which could
NOT have been included, had the Jesuits been responsible for the transmission of the story
to the Maya during conquest times.
Next, the thirteen tribes cross, exactly as it is stated in the Bible, Israels twelve tribes,
and the mixed multitude that accompanied them. - Exodus 12:38.
The parallel with Israels crossing of the Suph (Red) Sea, is far too obvious to be over-
looked. Internally, within the Popol Vuh, it is in a northeast direction -Popol Vuh pp. 67-
69, that they crossed this sea, heading for Tuln, Hacavitz and the original Chicn Itz,
on the other side of the Atlantic. Since the balance of the story of the time spent in Tuln
has not yet occurred, it is clear that Tuln, Hacavitz, etal, lay in a northeasterly direction
from the crossing. - Discovery of Ancient America p. 105.
From the west we came to Tuln - Annals of the Cakchiquels p. 45.
The red sea crossing was indeed from west to east. Yet we read, from the same source
of Mayan documents, that the ancient Quich--Maya claim to have originally come from
the east, across the Atlantic Ocean:
These were the the three nations of the Quichs , and they came from where the sun
rises... - Titulo de los Seores de Totanicapn, p.170.
This apparent dichotomy has thrown confusion on the archeologists, since they insist
that the entire history of the ancient Quich-Maya took place in the Meso-America region
rather than believing those histories as factual.
The Popol Vuh and the Titulo Coyoi number the tribes at thirteen, the precise number
given in the Bible
Quoting now from the Annals of the Cakchiquels, Translated by Recinos and Goetz, we
hear further amplification of the dryshod sea crossing.
Then we arrived at the shore of the sea. There all the tribes and warriors were reunit-
ed at the shore of the sea. And when they looked upon it their hearts were heavy...There
was no way to cross it...And we spoke to them in this manner. Go, you, go first, careful-
ly!...How can we cross, in truth, we who are here? Thus we all said. Thus they said,
Have pity on us, Oh, brother! who have come to gather here on the shore of the sea,
unable to see our mountains and our valleys. If we remain here to sleep we shall be con-
quered... And our grandfathers...said, We say to you: Let us go to work, our brothers!
We have not come to stay here huddled at the shore of the sea...Let us plunge [into the
sea] immediately! Thus they said, and at once all of them were filled with joy.
When we arrived at the gates of Tuln, we received a red stick * which was our staff,
and because of that we were given the name Cakchiquel [s], oh, our sons! said Gagavits
and Zactecauh (zac camp). Let us thrust the points of our staffs into the sand under the
sea and we shall soon cross the sea on the sand, using the red sticks which we went to
receive at the gates of Tuln. Thus we passed, over the rows of sand, when it widened
below the sea and on the surface of the sea [floor] ...They plunged forward then and
passed over the sand; those who came at the rear entered the sea as we emerged from
the waters on the other bank.
- The Annals of the Cakchiquels pp. 54-55.
* Red-brown Egyptian military spears of Exodus (Josepheus, Antiquities, II. I. 6).
NOTE: the people did not get their staffs (spears) until they arrived on the other side of the sea. This anachronism can be
explained by mythology. Also some re-arranging of the historic elements has occurred in the Mayan written record, as a
result of many hundreds of years of oral transmission and mythic, traditions.
In the Titulos de los Seores de Totonicapn, we read: When they arrived at the edge
of the sea, Balam-Quitz touched it with HIS staff and at once a path opened. **
Here nothing is mentioned about the people thrusting their staff points into the sea.
- Titulos de los Seores de Totonicapn. p. 55, footnote 51.
** Balam Quitz, here, is identical with "Kukulcn" who, led the forefathers for forty years in the wilderness.
From four places the people came to Tuln. In the east is one Tuln; another in
Xibalbay; and another where god is. Therefore, there were four Tulns, Oh, our sons! So
they said. From the west we came to Tuln, from across the they told us.
- IBID p. 45.
Then we have this amazing statement:
These then were the three nations of the Quiches, and they came from where the sun
rises, descendants of Israel, of the same language and the same customs...When they
arrived at the edge of the sea, Balam Quitz touched it with his staff and at once a path
opened, which then closed up again, for thus the great god wished it to be done, because
they were the sons of Abraham and Jacob.
- Titulo de los Seores de Totanicapn p. 170.
It is perhaps this strong statement alone that has led archeologists to disbelieve the
written histories of the Maya and conclude that the Catholic missionaries must have had a
hand in their creation, or at the least in their alteration. This seems a reasonable conclu-
sion at first glance, because of the glaring positive and seemingly bizzare nature of the
claim, but in light of the linguistic evidence that is unfolding in this work, we must ulti-
mately conclude that this story was actually handed down through generations of Maya.
We shall also conclude that the ancient Maya were, indeed, NOT the actual people of the
story, that it was an assimilated history, but certainly NOT in the manner that the archeolo-
gists would have us believe.
Israelite "EXODUS" Account:
"Then Yahweh ( : ) said to Moses. Tell the people of Israel to turn back and encamp in
front of Pi-ha-khirioth, between Migdol and the sea in front of Baal-zephon, you shall
encamp over against it by the sea. For Pharoah will say of the people of Isarel, They are
entangled in the land; the wilderness has shut them in. And I will harden the Pharoahs
heart and he will persue them and I will get glory over Pharoah and all his host; and the
Egyptians shall know that I am Yahweh, and they did so...The Egyptians persued them, all
the Pharoahs horses and chariots and his horsemen and his army, and overtook them
encamped by the sea...When the Pharoah drew near, the people of Israel lifted up their
eyes...and they were in great fear. And the people of Israel cried out to Yahweh; and they
said to Moses, Is it because there are no graves in Egypt that you have taken us away to die
in the wilderness? What have you done to us, in bringing us out of Egypt?...And Moses said
to the people Fear not, stand firm and see the salvation of Yahweh which he will work for
you today; for the Egyptians whom you see today, you shall never see again...Yahweh said
to Moses, Lift up your rod strech out your hand over the sea and divide it that the people of
Israel may go on dry ground through the sea...Then Moses streched out his hand over the
sea; and Yahweh drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night, and made the sea dry
land and the waters were divided. And the people of Israel went into the midst of the sea on
dry ground, the waters being a wall to them on their right hand and on their left...So Moses
streched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to its wonted flow when the morn-
ing appeared; and the Egyptians fled into it...not one of them remained...Thus Yahweh saved
Israel from the hand of the Egyptians... - Exodus: chapter fourteen
Israel and the Mixed multitude (thirteen tribes in total), left Egypt in turmoil and depart-
ed, to the east, into the desert; then according to Exodus, turned and went south by way of
the Suph Sea (Red Sea). Of course the first portion of the Suph Sea that they would
encounter would have to be the arm of the Red Sea known today as the Gulf of Suez.
Within less than a days travel time (roughly twenty miles per day), they became trapped
at Baal Zephon.
Baal Zephon ( hidden baal ) a mountain peak, is situated behind Pi Kirioth (the place
of the crossing), or Pi Ha Kirioth, is the pocket of land between the Sea on their left hand
and the mountains on their right. This would give the appearance that the land had
trapped them. This is an easily identifiable place. A topographical map of the region, ie.
World Aeronautical Chart (WAC) will show beyond question where they crossed, the loca-
tion being 29 degrees 56min. north latitude, by 32 degrees 27min. east longitude. This
mountain range, called locally "Jebel Atakah" terminates at the sea and up on the ridges of
this escarpment is a nearly perfect, natural pyramid shape of a light coloration, the Baal
Zephon ( hidden baal ). Baal otherwise known as the "sun god." Ba'al is sometimes rep-
resented by the pyramid-topped obelisk. This is the only geographical location which fits
every feature given in the biblical description and in Josepheus, who states:
They (Egyptians) also seized on the passages by which they imagined the Hebrews
might fly, shutting them up between the inaccessable precipices and the sea; for there
were mountains that terminated at the sea, which were impassable by reason of their
roughness - which army they placed at the chops of the mountains. So they might
deprive them of any passage into the plain.
- Josepheus, Antiquities, Book II ch XV vs. 3.
Mayan Account: CAKCHIQUEL
"CAKCHIQUEL:" Directly associated with the dryshod sea crosssing, as we have seen
above, and precisely because of it, according to the Maya, the tribes involved in that awe-
some event received the appellation of Cakchiquel. - Annals of the Cakchiquels, p. 55.
It is safe to say that the Mayan forefathers were not actually the tribe involved in the
crossing, but that the later, Israelite dominated :: hywym (Maya), whether in
Palestine following the conquest by Israelites - or later as Tolteca in Quich, -were hand-
ed this story from their Hebrew overlords. . It seems impossible that any Mayan forefa-
thers were present at the crossing, because it shall be demonstrated, the ancestors of the
Maya were the biblical tribe called, Hivites :: ( hwym /kHiwym ). This brown-
skinned tribe lived in the land of Palestine, about to be conquered by the soon arriving
tribes of Israel. This precludes their attendance, with the Israelites as they left Egypt.
Therefore, we shall examine the Shemetic meaning of the phrase Cakchiquel. in this
appropriate and interesting context; CAKCHIQUEL.
.. (kha-gag) march in a sacred procession (2287)
,:: (shook) street, to run over (7783-4)
:, (kol) fame (6963
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :, ,:: ..
Phonetic: Kha -gag shooq-qol [Hebrew conjunction ]
Mayan Account: CHI-PIXAB
Following the crossing of the sea, the tribes - all thirteen of them - find themselves at
the mountain of command, or the mandate mountain. In the Mayan book, it is
called, Chi-Pixab.. " - Popol Vuh, 1977, pp. 70, 182.
c: (shep-ee) hill, or high place (8205)
:. (aw-shaw) transgression (sin) (6213)
: (ab) father (2)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: CHI PIX AB ( Chi-pish ab - X =Sh sound)
Hebrew: : :. c:
Phonetic: shep-ee -shaw -ab [ Hebrew conjunction ]
Israelite Account:
This place can only be Mt. Horeb in the Sinai desert, where the children of Israel
received the commandments. The great sin committed by the children of Israel at Mt.
Horeb, in Sinai, was the creation by Aaron and the worship by Israel, of the golden calf-
god of Egypt ( Apis ). For those unfamiliar with this story, it is told in Exodus - Exodus
It is then, an appropriate desctiption of Mt. Horeb Shephi-Ashab in Hebrew or, Chi-
Pixab in Mayan.
The mere fact that the Maya went to a "mountain of command" or, a "mountain of
mandate," (law) after crossing a sea through parted waters, while walking on stones and
sand (on the dry the sea floor), is sufficient evidence to connect the history with the
biblical Exodus relation. The additional facts that follow, such as the anger of the
Israelites at Moses, for leading them out into the wilderness "to die," and the lack of
food except for "roots" which were found laying around on the ground (the Manna), and
the period of "forty years" of wandering, which is mentioned in the Popol Vuh, should
increase the "proof" that the stories are one and the same. The place names, given by the
Maya, we shall see, further identify the Popol Vuh, with the Hebrew account and the
places of the Exodus story.
Ultimately we will find out that Moses is identified in the Mayan story, as is the relation
of the story of the battle of Jericho (although the city is un-named in the Mayan account).
The conquest of Palestine by Israel is also alluded to, as well as the subjugation of the
Hivite tribe of the Kanaanite confederation who had populated the Levant prior to Israels'
sudden and dramatic arrival there in 1400 BC. under the leadership of Yahushua ben Nun
the famous, Israelite Army Commander .
All that remains, is to find out why or how, these supposedly remote and unconnected
families of man, whose ancient lands are separated by a great ocean, as we find them
today, could possibly possess the identical heros and histories. In this work we shall do
that very thing, and in doing so, we shall also find out that previous assumptions which
have been made by anthropologists, and dogmatically held to for centuries, are simply
wrong and need to be corrected.
Three deities of the MAYA:
As soon as the story of the wanderings begins we find mention of the deities who
accompanied the tribes. We can find connected ideas with respect to the Israelites, if we
examine the names of these deities in Hebrew.
Tohil-il is put in a chest, when put in his chest (ark), immediately Avilix appeared.
Also Hacavitz is mentioned as a third deity. -Popol Vuh, p. 175.
Israelite Account:
One cannot rightly call this an "Israelite account" because these names are not directly
used in the biblical text. However, one need only translate these names to reveal the clear
and direct relationship to the Hebrew account. The story is the same, the names are really
titles, and for this reason, some have become confused.
Hebrew: Tohelh-el:
:: :: tohelah-el laudation, hymn of praise to a mighty one. ( #8416-410 )
The placement of "Tohlh-el" in a chest is certainly either a great coincidence or a direct
allusion to the ark of the covenant, made by the Israelites under Yahwehs' command, to
carry the tablets of the law, the rod of Aaron, and a sample of the Manna. The ark and its
"mercy seat" was the place of normal communication between Yahweh and Moses during
the wandering of Israel. It is for this reason that some would perceive, though it clearly
could not contain him, that the deity had "gone into the chest."
Mayan Account: when put in his chest (ark), immediately Avilix appeared.
:: (avel ) unrighteous, evil (764 )
: (aysh ) male entity (376)
An obvious allusion to omnipresent and evil Satan, or Azazel, which is another name
for Satan. Using the same reasoning as above, the "hiding" of the good deity (supposedly
in his chest), would precipitate the evil influence of the bad deity. Something on the order
of, "When the cat's away, the mice will play," so to speak. Some may have perceived it in
this way.
Mayan Account:
Hakavitz Name of the god of the Ahua Quich - Popol Vuh p 170 & 225
(ha) the ( definite article )
:: (kawah) burning (one) (3554)
:. (itza) who brings forth, (3318)
This seems to be an obvious allusion to the fact that : (Yahweh) dwelt in a pillar of
fire, and was extremely bright of appearance. So bright that Moses is stated to have shown
with brightness himself after meeting with Yahweh. Of course, the fact that it was Yahweh
who had brought forth his people out of captivity in Egypt is compelling.
HACAVITZ: Another possible translation of this name is: : :: ( Hwk-ebetz )
:: (Hwk) to bring up again, (1946)
: (ebetz ) to gleam conspicuously (77)
This translation also seems to allude to the Shekinah Glory (gleaming column of fire in
which Yahweh dwelt and from which he "brought up again" his people from captivity in
the land of Egypt).
Mayan Account:
"One people, two lordships." - Titulo C'oyoi, carmack p. 287.
Israelite Account:
Israel: (Joseph) and Judah, were always considered two separate national entities, even
under the leadership of King David and his son Solomon. They were always referred to as:
"Israel" and "Judah" There were two royal houses after Solomonss death. Therefore one
could rightfully say Israel was one people, yet two lordships
- Joshua 18:5 and II Samuel. 4:4.
Mayan Account:
"GIRON GAGAL," mentioned as a gift to the people - at the same point in the story that
the thirteen tribes left for HACAVITZ -as they had not yet settled there. - Popol Vuh,
1977, p. 205
:~. (ghe -rem) skeleton, bones (1633-4-5)
: (ka) hitherto, beforetimes ( 3542 )
:. (ga-al) free (1351)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: GIRON GAGAL ( N and M are sometimes interchanged in Hebrew)
Hebrew: :. : :~.
Phonetic: gherem kah gaal
Israelite Account:
The skeleton of Joseph is meant here, the Girom gagal wrapped, of course, in his long
sleeved tunic of diverse colors, the Pasam cagal, as previously noted. These are two very
related concepts, but rather hard to relate or understand if one does not actually look at the
Hebrew words involved.
Mayan Account:
CAWINAL At one point in the story of the Quich people, speaking of a time of humility,
when some of their number died and disappeared, the CAWINAL is refered to.
- Quechean Civilization, Carmack pp 289-290.
: (ka-a) grieved, made sad (3512)
: (oee) woe, lamentation (188)
:: (na -hal) lead (gently on) (5095)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: : :
Phonetic: ka -oee nahal
Israelite Account:
Perhaps it is at the point in- Exodus 32: 25-35, when several thousand of the people
were killed for the sin, of the creation by Aaron, and the worship by Israel, of the golden
calf, that the kah-owy-nahal portion of the story occurred.
Mayan Account:
The Popol Vuh continues: after leaving the Mountain of command they wandered with-
out food subsisting on roots for a time being troubled and disgusted with the place - Popol
Vuh p. 71. In another Mayan Titulo the Titulo Coyoi, the fathers ate Tic-oj (tacos)
an otherwise undefined food. - Quichean Civilization, Carkack p. 288
"Tic-oj" food grudgingly eaten by the forefathers.
:: (ta -ka) strewn (8497)
:. (aw-sah) feast (6213)
:: (oth) miracle (226)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: TIC-OJ
Hebrew: :: :: :. ::
Phonetic: ta -ka-sah -- ta -k -oth
Israelite Account:
The Israelites complained bitterly to the point of, twice, wanting to stone Moses to death
for their lacking of food and water, not being satisfied with the manna which fell on the
ground each night, the Manna which they ate for forty years in the wilderness. Manna
was not the name of the food. Manna, of course, means What is it? It was a feast which
lay strewn about the ground each morning - tic-oj - from a Mayan point of view.
Israelite Account:
All of Israel ate manna for forty years in the wilderness, led by Moses.
Now the house of Israel called its name manna; it was like coriander seed, white and
the taste of it was like wafers made of honey...And the people ate the manna forty
years till they came to habitable land" - Exodus 16:31-35
"And Yahweh's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the
wilderness forty years, until all the generation that had done evil in the sight of Yahweh
was consumed." - Numbers 32:13
Mayan Account:
Under, "a leader named Kukulcn...after forty years of wandering they finally reached
Chichn Itz - Popol Vuh, p. 67.
After crossing the sea, on foot, other Mayan accounts claim that they arrived in the fabled
land of Tuln (ibid p. 63 and Annals of the Cakchiquels, p 45), also called Hacavitz
and Jo Balam Kana. - Quechean Civilization p. 289.
It is this name Kana that is of interest here. Kana is the correct, Hebrew name for
Palestine, otherwise known as the Land of Kanaan. The details are found later in this
work. Kana is the prime root.
The leader that led Israel for forty years in the wilderness was Moses.
Was Kukulcn then, not the same personage as Moses, whio led the Israelites?
Hero of the Mayan Histories
Within the Mayan histories, it is clear that there were two distinct individuals called
Kukulcn. One, the first, was a Maya forefather (actually an Israelite) who led the
ancestors on the other side of the sea for a period of forty years.* During that period, they
crossed the sea dryshod, and wandered in a general northeasterly direction, towards
Tuln (which in Hebrew means, eminence). This Kukulcn, of necessity, must have
been Moses. Has Moses ever been called Kukulcn in the scripture of the Israelites?
* Mayanologists have identified this Kukulcn with the Balam Quitz
that parted the sea (there were other Balam Quitzs). See NOTE: page 25.
Emphatically, yes, as we shall demonstrate anon.
The second Kukulcn,( Quetzalcoatl ) was a Tolteca / Norse King of the third century
A.D. whose name was "Votan," both in Chiapas and Thule (Scandanavia). Votan is well
known in the Norse sagas. The Yinglinga saga claims that Votan wandered the world for
ten years during a banishment. He returned to Thule, and once more became Votan
man/god-king of the Norse. It is our contention that he was meanwhile, Votn/Kukulcn
the Tolteca, man/god-king of the Maya. Mayanologists have confused and blended these
stories with those of the later Tolteca kings and have restricted them all to Guatemala.
As might be expected, a misunderstanding of the origins of the ancient Maya histories
has been created by modern Mayanologists. This was because of blind prejudice against
Biblical history (the original stories that the Popol Vuh parrots) and, in fact, against the
Mayan people themselves. A thousand, two hundred years of mythmaking has occurred,
between Kukulcn 2 (Votn, called "Quetzalcoatl") and the conquistador Hernando Cortes
arrival (Thought, by the indigenes to be Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcn returning). Three thousand
years transpired between Corts arrival in Mexico and Kukulcn 1 (Moses). It is, seeming-
ly, amazing that neither the Shemetic language base, nor the histories, changed much at
all. The Toltec dynasty of 11 Quetzalcoatl kings, lasting up to the 12th century A.D. adds
to the confusion of, and blending of, stories attributed to Kukulcn/Quetzalcoatl/Votn
(including confusion of Moses with Votan of the Norse, both called "Kukulcn").
NOTE: The present day Quiche branch of the Maya still speak this language.
If the reader has become somewhat confused over this apparent chaos, it is understand-
able. The object of this work is to clarify the issue, by demonstrating that the ancient lan-
guage of the Maya (Quich Mayan) was, withou reservation, Shemetic whose origins are
from the near and middle east and stem from deepest antiquity.
The conclusions then, as to whom these people really were, should be relatively easy, as
there remain few alternatives. The ancient Maya came from the eastern Mediterranean,
sometime before the 1st century A.D. (because the Tolteca city of Teotihuacan was not built
until approximately the 3rd or 4th century A.D. around an earlier Temple of Quetzalcoatl;
and the Maya owe their cultural development and high civilization to Quetzalcoatl of the
Tolteca. They were Khametic - Phoenician / Carthaginians from the tribe of cHwym
(Hivites), originally from the land of Kanaan. It is most likely that they migrated to Quich
(the Guatamalan frontier shore) sometime after Israels invasion of their cities in Kanaan,
circa 1400 B.C. Their civilization developed very slowly, never reaching a cultural zenith
until the time of the Tolteca, about 3rd century A.D. at which time the great cities were
built under the Tolteca dominance.
Mayan Account: Leaders name, Kukulcn, place names: Chakanputn, Bolonpel
Uitz, & Chichn Itz.
In this same region, at a place called Chakanputn there lived for a space of 250 years
a tribe called the Itz*...This tribe came from the land of Bolonpel Uitz...In a Katun 8 of
the Maya short count [any twenty year period]...a group of Maya-speaking people
began moving slowly northeastward across the peninsula. Part of these at least were the
Itz...under a leader named Kukulcn... having been living in what is now southwestern
Campeche [sic] for some two to two and one half centuries. After forty years of wander-
ing, they finally reached Chichn Itz where they established their capital...
- Popol Vuh. p. 67.
*Genesis 21:12 states that Abrahams descendents shall be called by the name of
"Itzakh-aq" -
,. (ytsahqq) laughter - Israels Father, Abrahams son (3327)
Kukulcn: parted the sea and led the people forty years in the wilderness.
,, (khuquq) lawgiver (2706-10)
: (el) highest (5927)
:: (khan) priest (3547)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: : ,,
Phonetic: Khuquq -el -Khan
Israelite Account:
Biblical equivalent of "Kukulcn" is certainly Moses. With Yahweh's direction and help,
Moses brought forth the Israelites out of Egypt and the 400 years of slavery; first, north-
eastward across the Suph Sea on foot, into the Sinai peninsula, then, eastward into the
wilderness of Midian for forty years of "wandering" across the Jordan river, westward into
Israel's portion of the promised land of Kanaan, as previously cited. It must be noted that
as soon as the Israelites crossed the Suph Sea, they were actually within the borders of
the Greater Promised Land, as defined in Genesis:
"Unto thy seed I have given this land from the River of Egypt unto the great river the
River Euphrates." - Genesis 15:18.
When Abraham travelled through the promised land, he did, in fact, visit Egypt, therefore
the portion of Egypt which lies east of the River Nile belongs to the greater promised land.
The appellation Kukulcn definitely applies to Moses, as he is called lawgiver
(Khukuk) in the Bible (Numbers 21:18). Moses is also called an el, eloahy (Mighty
one ) - Exodus 4:17. Finally, by virtue of the fact that he met face to face with Yahweh
and acted as intercessor for the people of Israel (Exodus 33:11 among other places ), he
therefore, held the office of high priest as well. Though he was not of the priestly order of
Aaron, his priesthood was of a higher order than that of his brother Aaron.
Kukulcn-Quetzalcoatl-Votn... MOSES?
The title Kukulcn (Lawgiving High Priest), applies equally well to the 3rd century
Norse, Votan (Votn/Quetzalcoatl), a man divinity of whom it is said:
...instructed it Natives in the use of metals, in agriculture and in the arts of government
{laws} was the golden age of Anhuac.
- Conquest of Mexico, Prescott, p. 39.
After this Quetzalcoatl there were eleven, known Tolteca, dynastic kings, named
Quetzalcoatl. This dynasty lasted almost up to the twelfth century A.D. and the irruption
into Anhuac of the Azteca hordes in 1325 A.D. When the Azteca arrived they sought out
Tolteca families, with whom a royal mating might take place. They found only eleven
Tolteca families in all Anhuac. - Popol Vuh, Recinos p. 67.
SPECIAL NOTE: The Mayan spellings are fifteenth century Spanish phonetics, based on Spanish sounds
and archaic Spanish symbols, some of which do not precisely exist in English. Therefore, the English
spellings must be compared vocally, with the Mayan, in order to hear the similar sounds. Hard, fast modern
linguistic rules for transliteration and sound value are also, sometimes misleading and even useless. Some
meanings may only be figurative. The evolution of the idiom over the millenia has caused this to occur. This
fact, coupled with the creolization of the Shemetic tongue has led Mayan linguistic students astray.
Poetic and figurative meanings have sometimes taken over the literal ones. As an exam-
ple: Balam means Jaguar in modern Mayan tongues, but anciently it meant lords.
This value is ascertained by the context of the Mayan accounts of their forefathers, calling
them "balam." This mutation probably originated with the Lords (Ba'alym) of the "Jaguar
clan or priesthood, who wore Jaguar skins as a sign of office, finally evolving and convo-
luting into a new signification: "Balam" = Jaguar, rather than its original meaning, which
was obviously the well-known Shemetic word for Lords. This is a common occurrence
in any living language. We know that the Mayan forefathers ( actually Israelite ones in this
story ) were certainly not Jaguars, rather, they were men.
Finally the creolized-Shemetic form of the Mayan tongue explains the obvious absence
of proper Hebrew/Aramaic grammar. Most Mayan is composed of nouns verbs and adjec-
tives, minus grammar. In the Hebrew language, of course, there is no such thing as tense,
except as derived from the context, nor does punctuation exist in this ancient tongue. The
pidgen or creolized phrases such as, Long-time-no-see are common in the Mayan
texts, as well as in the speech patterns of other Meso-American Indians (i.e. - Popol
Vuh, Annals of the Cakchiquels, Titulo de los Seores de Totonicipn and the Titulo Coyi).
It is of utmost importance to the translators who follow to understand this point, no
matter how repugnant it may be to the theories now postulated as to the origins of the
Meso-Americans, such as the hypothetical Asian Land Bridge, nor to the strictures of
formal (modern) Hebrew as taught in Hebrew schools among the Jews of this day.
Creaolized languages follow their own rules.
Mayan Account:
Chakanputn," the land from which the leader Kukulcn led his people, who had been
there for some two and a half centuries (or more). - Popol Vuh, p. 66.
::: (shakan) dwelling place, habitation ( 7931)
::c (poot) contempt, disparagement (6316-7)
:: (tan) elongated (8565)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: ::c :::
Phonetic:: Shakan-Put-tan
Israelite Account:
Biblical equivalent of this place of centuries of dwelling in contemptous and disparaging
servitude is, without question, Egypt. The long contempt of people being held in bondage,
as was Israel for ( not two-and-a-half ), but four centuries is an understandable statement.
Mayan Account:
bolonpel Uitz," The main people, the Itz, are stated to have been brought forth, by
Kukulcn (Moses) out of this place. Actually Bolonpel Uitz was a condition of being, rather
than a place. - Popol Vuh p. 67.
::: (bolom) be held in (1102)
:c (pel) great difficulty (6381)
.:: (lutz) scorn (3887)
Comparison: Transliteration:
Hebrew: .:: :c :::
Phonetic: Bolom-pel-lutz
Obviously, for an entire nation to be held as slaves for any extended period of time
would be a thing of scorn. Therefore, Bolonpel- Uitz (Bolom pel-lutz) was a condition from
which they came out of and not a physical place.
Note: The 250 year claim is very interesting in light of the dispute which arose in
Judaism, and was later disputed in Christianity, as early as the 3rd or 4th century B.C. over
the validity of the Masoritic (Biblical) claim of four hundred years for the captivity.
Josephus, in several places states the 400 year figure ( Antiquities, Book 1, X, 3 and Antiq.
bk. 2, IX, 1 ), then in an obvious abridgement by later numbers twiddlers, the figure 215
years for the Israelite captivity in Egypt, - an obvious gloss which appears in his work,
glares in contrast. On what basis this figure, or the other ones which were variously used
(430 and 250 years), were ascertained is known, but un-important. The fact that the 250
year figure was used, or disputed, in Palestine two thousand years ago is extremely signifi-
cant. It helps prove that we are dealing with the same history, on both sides of the Atlantic.
An important thing to note in all this, is that the figure 250 years, whether correct or
not, is a figure that was used anciently in the Middle east, thereby allowing the conclusion,
that the bearers of this tale, not actually present at the Exodus, were handing down a story
from an earlier epoch. This then, is precisely the case in the Mayan chronicles. They are
ancient historical ccounts of happenings on the other side of the sea. Events which actually
did take place several thousand years ago to the Maya (Hebrew) forefathers.
The 3rd century A.D. man-god, Votn/ Kukulcn, and Hebrew/Tolteca/Quich Maya
overlords carried the story of their ancient Exodus to the subjected Maya tribes, who in
turn assimilated as their own, the entire Israelite panoply of history. The Popol Vuh repre-
sents this history, combining it with over a millennium of creative Mayan mythology added
to spice the pot. The essentials of the story remain in clear concert with those of the Bible,
even to the creation and the later world-flood epoch, with which we do not deal in this
present work.
The official doctrine is, more or less, that Catholic priests in some vain attempt to
account for these people within their churchs dogma, devised the concept that these Maya
were lost Israelites, or possibly, Kanaanites. The false concept of Catholic missionaries
impressing upon the Maya their own biblical stories, which later were incorporated into the
Mayan histories, is so unsupported by fact that it is an obvious fabrication. Torquemada,
an 18th century, catholic historian was compelled to supress much information in his book
on the Native Americans, because the similarities of Mexican religious practices with those
of the Catholic Church did not fit Catholic doctrine, i.e. baptism, crosses etc., ( -Discovery of
Ancient America. p. 94. see History of the Conquest of Mexico and Peru, p. 697 . The
Catholic establishment already had their story and they were sticking to it, however, these
obvious similarities most certainly pointed to earlier trans-Atlantic contacts.
By holding tenaciously to this popular but false premise, Mayanologists and, in fact, the
majority of anthropologists and archaeologists and particularly linguists, have missed the
singularly most important aspect of the Popol Vuh and the other, few Mayan documents
written during the conquest period. That simple fact is; that the very nature of the spoken
language of the Maya, is Semitic (Shemetic).
Mayan Account:
"Chichn Itz." After forty years of wandering they finally reached Chichn Itz
- Popol Vuh, p. 67.
:::: (sheshen) joy (8342-48)
. (ytza) brought forth (3318)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: . ::::
Phonetic: Sheshen-Ytza
Israelite Account:
For an actual Hebrew, Biblical usage of this expression in the exact context ( that is
after 40 years of wandering )used by the Popol Vuh, see: Psalm 105:43. This close associ-
ation of words and ideas in parallel between two diverse cultures such as the Maya and
Israelite, is no mere coincidence. The accepted academic theory that Catholic- Jesuit priests
during the conquest era, embroidered the minds of the Maya neophytes with biblical sto-
ries, will not work in these instances where it is abundantly clear that the very Mayan lan-
guage ( specific words ) are the same as Hebrew. This, the Spanish Jesuits could never
have accomplished, had they desired. One must ask the question, Why would the
Spaniards have desired such a thing in the first place? What advantage would result from
teaching the Mayan people a new language? In this instance it was only one educated
Mayan noble who transcribed and transliterated the Popol Vuh into Spanish-Roman char-
How could the Jesuits have caused the entire Mayan nation to change languages? It is
totally absurd to conceive such an idea. Therefore: it is abundantly clear and simple; the
Maya spoke an ancient middle eastern language. Their very words testify to this fact.
Hebrew: . :::: ::::: ::. .:: ( Psalm 105:43)
The term . ytsa brought forth means from slavery in Egypt. This word is used in
the first commandment (Exodus. 20 :1) hw-ytsa-tyk ...has brought you forth... and car-
ries out the contextual meaning more fully.
The :::: SheShen (Joy) is from relief, both, from slavery and forty years of wander-
ing in the desert as a punishment for sins commited.
The Chichn Itz in Guatemala is, in fact, a ceremonial city, perhaps named for the
same type of salvation from an oceanic crossing, or, as a memorial to the earlier joyous
time, surely those times were not in Guatamala, but, on the other side of the sea, in
Tuln (the eminent land of promise).
Dr Cyrus Gordon has pointed out in his book, Before Columbus (Chapter X pp. 154 ff),
that there are numerous elements in the Popol Vuh which could not have been transmitted
to the Maya by Catholic missionaries of the conquest era. These minute elements are simply
not related in the Bible (and we might add, several points are totally absent from church
doctrine, although well attested to in the biblical text). The evidence, as Dr. Gordon saw it,
demonstrated an ancient connection, or intercourse, between the old and new worlds very
clearly, that is, to one who could recognize those nuances. The historic relation of the
ancient Quich Maya demanded an explanation which would incorporate, within it, an
early, pre-columbian connection with the near east. The anthropological establishment did
not readily or genreally accept his analysis, even if it came from an expert linquist and
Semeticist, and therefore, and typically, because of ignorance, bias and professional jeal-
ousy, panned his work which forcefully made that point of an early cultural connection
between the old and new world. Dr. Gordon was expressing his knowledge, that they
Dr. Gordon makes other important conclusions regarding early Phoenician travels to Hy
Barzal the island of iron ( continent of South America ), based on minute examination of
the stylistic forms and linguistic details of the Phoenican language which were incorporated
into the Paraiba Inscription from Brazil (barzal means iron in Hebrew ). These were
unknown at the time of the inscription's discovery in the nineteenth century.
Dr. Gordon has made those correct cultural conclusions, even in absence of these lin-
guistic parallels that have been uncovered in this work.
Other linguists, such as Professor Lyle Campbell (L.S.U.), famous for his establishment
approved linguistic work with the Maya, will have none of it. He takes the stance the
Mayan language is totally independent of near-eastern, or middle-eastern, or seemingly
any outside influence. He does this in the face of overwhelming evidence, not only of cul-
tural parallels ( such as pyramid building, sun worship, infanticide, pottery, agricultural
techniques and many other architectural details ), but historic ones as well (such as the
extremely explicit internal data within the very text of the Popol Vuh ), religious practices
of sun worship and infanticide, and now the absolutely overwhelming amout of linguistic
evidence which is being presented here complete the picture. Professor Campbell has seen
some of this work in advance of publication. He believes that the present language as spo-
ken is the only reference point from which to make comparisons. He is not a Semiticist.
This researcher has personally spoken with modern Mayan, Quiche speakers and has
found that the similarities are yet present, even today. Why hasnt Lyle Campbell spoken to
Quich Mayans with a Shemitic ear? Probably because he has no Shemitic ear with which
to listen.
If we were to treat the English language as professor Campbell treats Mayan, were we
lacking the rich literature and continuum of history that is available to us in the Anglo-
Saxon histories, we would have great difficulty, since our starting point has to be English
as spoken today, among its various communities. As most people know, English did not
even exist a thousand years ago. But what of the history of the Anglo-Saxons back beyond
that point, before 1066 and the Battle of Hastings. The Anglo-Saxons and Britons spoke
Norean, in those days, a language closely associated with modern Norwegian.
Using Professor Campbell's reasoning and logic. we would have to conclude that the
major English speaking peoples bear no relationship to the ancient Anglo-Saxons, that is, if
we were forced by linguists to stay within the limited confines English as spoken. This
arcane and unreasonable thinking utilized by the Mayan historical linguists is typified by
Lyle Campbell. Nice man. Very pleasantand congenial. But entirely wrong.
It is, therefore, the position of this researcher that the Mayan historical linguist commu-
nity and the higher educational - indoctrination system, as a whole, is in error. And the
goal of this work is to demonstrate that ever-prepetuated, academic error, while giving evi-
dence for the actual, ancient, near eastern linguistic origins and nexus of the Maya.
The Professor Campbells of this world have completely bought into a system that was
devised for them, before most had seen the light of day or felt the breath of life. It is a self-
prepetuating system of doctrine, dogma and philosophy. It is a philosophy that discounts
the biblical histories and counts them as myth. It then take the written histories of the
Maya, as a prime example, and discounts the internal data and applies their own closely
held theroetics over those Mayan details, which they ignore or misinterpret, based on their
preconceived dogma. Thus, a doctor of Mayan historical linguistics cow tows to his doctoral
board, a board that will eventually ceritfy him as acceptable ( kosher ), and another genera-
tion of ignorance and misinformation takes hold. - ad prepetua, ad infinitum, ad naseum.
Our view is quite different. This view accepts the Mayan internal data as actual ( or at
least not far from reality, allowing for some legend and myth to develop over the milleni-
ums as is expected and normal ). In so doing, we have seen the Shemetic linguistic simi-
larities shine out of the text, where dogmatic academics have failed.
The Mayan
Battle of Jerichoin the PopolVuh
It is amazing, but quite true, that the Mayan Popol Vuh contains an extremely close
version of this famous biblical story. Sequentially, it does not appear, at first glance, to be
in order, however it is prefaced with this statement, Now we shall tell of their arrival in
Tuln " (Kana / Hacavitz), and that makes it precisely in order. The narrative continues:
The tribes did not number sixteen thousand, or twenty-four thousand men (but even
more)... They surrounded the town, crying out loudly, armed with arrows and shields,
beating drums, giving war whoops, whistling, shouting, inciting them to fight, when
they arrived in front of the town...They only thought of the strength and the shouting of
the tribes when they came up the side of the mountain... Shortly before they were about
to throw themselves at the entrance of the town, the four gourds which were at the edge
of the town were opened and the bumblebees and wasps came out of the gourds, like a
great cloud of smoke the emerged from the gourds. And thus the warriors perished
because of the insects which stung the pupils of their eyes...they could no longer grasp
their bow and their shields which were broken to the ground...Neither was it a deed of
valor, because the warriors were not killed by arrows or by shields.
-Popol Vuh, Recinos, p.202-203.
Please note the mythological selectivity of the insects, - only the enemy soldiery were
dispatched, not the attackersor conquerors.
Israelite Account:
The famous story of the destruction of Jericho is well known, after the tribes of Israel
marched around the enclosed, walled city for seven days, silently at first, but on the sev-
enth day, after seven turns, with the blowing of rams horns and shouting, a great earth-
quake from Yahweh felled the walls leading to the citys destruction at the hands of
Joshuas army. This story is found in the book of Joshua - Joshua 5:10 - 6:27.
What is interesting about this story is that it seems as though the bumblebees did the
destruction. In the biblical narrative, it is clearly Yahweh that accomplishes this feat,
although it is questionable whether a million, or so, soldiers yelling would have the power
to harmonically induce an earthquake, even after shaking the ground around the town for
seven days and thirteen trips around, the implication is that Yahweh, the mighty one, did
the breaking down of the walls, but it surely was accompanied by a great shout or, dabar.
The word for a destruction by speech, ie. shout in Hebrew is ~: (dabar). The word
in Hebrew for "bumblebee" or "bee" is ( deborah ). It seems apparent that the original
meaning was that the shout of Israel, or the dabar ( word ) of Yahweh, tumbled the walls
of Jericho down.
That the concept of dabar meaning destruction by word or shout could change into
bumblebee Deborah is neither strange nor rare. In mythology meanings are very soon
twisted from some other original word. In this case, at least in Hebrew, the meanings are
uniquely appropriate.
~: (deborah) bee, (bumblebee) (1697)
~: (dabar) word, destruction (1682)
by speech, shout
Hebrew: ~: Dabar:
Among the Hebrews, the bee was related to the idea of language because of the
name debure (bee), and the Hebraic root dbr which means word or speech (22)
22 Les Symboles des Egyptiens, Cf. Fred Portal, 1840, p. 56"
- The Bestiary of Christ, Lasky, L.C. p. 324.
The bee between the lips of the sun god was intended to point him out as the
word for dabar, the expression which signifies in Chaldee a bee signifies also a
word. - The Two Babylons, Hislop, Alexander, p. 194.
The Hebrew word ~. (hatsorah) means hornets ( a wasp is a large hornet) or
scourge. The biblical statements in Exodus 23:28, Deut. 7:20, and Joshua 24:12
I will (or did) send my hornets before you, quite literally meant:
I will (or did) send my scourge before you.
The KJV mistranslation is extremely revealing, because, even the King James translators
made the identical error ( allusion ) that the Mayans had made before them in their telling
of the old story. In the retelling of the story, just as dabar, evolved, verbally, from word
(of Yahweh) or shout (of Israel) to bumble bee ( for the Maya Indians). ~: dabar
word and Bee both words nearly are the same spelling- both are from the same cog-
nate or prime root . A similar thing is true of the word hatsorah which became
wasps, simply because, hornets are wasps. The Bible does not mention wasps, but it
does mention hornets- which in reality is not a reference to either insect but rather
Yahwehs scourge, hatsorahYahweh.
Since in the biblical account of the fall of Jerico ( obviously the same as the un-named
city of the Popol Vuh ), the peoples warlike prowess did not win the battle, but rather, a
thing from Yahweh. In this case his scourge, hatsorah. This thing we do not fully under-
stand, but we can safely understand that it was NOT hornets or wasps. Yet the similarity
of words, which have mutated in both relations of the story, the Mayan and the ever popu-
lar King James Version of the Bible, have demonstrated the true meaning, and thus the
similarity is more than simply coincidental. In fact, this mutation and both similar mis-
translations, confirm the stories as one and the same. - see Strong's No. 6879 & 6880
As a point of reference, in the original translations from Mayan to Spanish some inter-
pretative license was taken, as is evidenced by the differing meanings assigned by the
modern translators. The numerous phonetic values assigned also varied. For example; on
page 82 of the Popol Vuh, in footnote 3, guc is rendered Guc, quc, or kuk obviously
Quk, Guk and CHoq Chok, kuch, Chug and Qug are potential phonetic renderings as
X, in Mayan, is equal to Sh in English or Hebrew. This is because in archaic Spanish
the letter X was used to designate the sound SH. Mexico = Meshico.
R and L are often interchanged as well as are letters such as , M and N, D and T, B and V.
The consonants K, Q, KH, G are many times interchanged and x -Tz (Tzade) is often ren-
dered S, Z, Tz, Ts or even Dz.
CH in Mayan (Spanish phonetics), can be rendered as SH in hebrew, although one is
never absolutely positive what Spanish phonetic sound the native writers actually had in
mind. Obviously, since they had the X at their disposal for the "SH" sound, "CH" must not
stand for "C" or "SH." In some cases, in English, this letter combination has a KH sound
and in others it carries a SH sound (i.e. Chicago = SH or Character = KH or Charles =
TSCH). It is called by linguists, a whistling frictive. It remains open to debate whether
some of the original Spanish phonetics, when converted to modern Spanish by Recinos,
and later to English by Goetz and Morley have made the transition well. For instance, the
ancestral land in Tuln, Chivim, has been, variously rendered, Zuivan, Civan and Chivan.
In the works of Josephus, as translated into Greek by the author himself, when found in
Hebrew place-names which were transliterated, not translated, this Hebrew letter in ques-
tion, the ( ) "keth" ( kH --very gutteral "ch " or "kh" ) has been rendered "s." This was
done, Josephus himself, because there is no equivalent sound in Greek - nor English or
Spanish for that matter in our present case. It is a sound unique to shemetic languages,
similar to a clearing of one's throat. It is proposed here, that this precise gutteral sound
(letter value) is what the Mayan transliterator of the Popol Vuh, rendered as "CH" in such
important words as "Sivan, Tuln," the tribal name, and "Chalaq" in the division of the sea,
for the tribes to walk across.
Vowel points did not exist in ancient Hebrew at all. The so called semi- vowels :
, ( y, h, w, & a ) were, in fact, actual vowels, -Josephus Wars, V,V,7.
The Hebrew Conjunction is a rule rather than an exception. It forces words in sen-
tences, phrases and even names, to become conjuncted or conjoined when adjoining sylla-
bles are alike. Such as Yahw-hwshua, which becomes Yahwshua, the final syllable of the
first merges with the first syllable of the last word and you have a Hebrew conjunction.
This point has confused translators who, up to this time, are unable to make the proper
translations. They separate and join syllables at will. This is probably the reason that the
similarity between these ancient languages has not been discovered, or if it has been dis-
covered, kept so great a secret.
Francisco Ximnez, in 1857, published the first Spanish Version of the Popol Vuh. In his
Ximnez...maintains that the Quich language is the principal one in all the world.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos, Goetz, Morley, p. 75.
What this actualy means, is that the ancient Quich language is Shemetic, because
Akkadian/Shemetic is the principal (first) language of all the world. As anyone who has
studied the subject knows, archaeologists and linguists have typically paid absolutely no
attention to Ximnez important statement. This, of course is because their pre-conceived
notion of evolutionary, polar wandering, precludes any possibility of Mayan (or any
ancient American culture for that matter) to have had long-standing intercourse, much
less any connection with the middle east. It goes without saying that they emphatically
want no connection with biblical histories. It is their "sacred cow," in a manner of speak-
ing. However the Nexus ( connection ) is real, regardless of their "religious" doctrinal
Mayan Account:
In relating the truthful and most excellent accounting of the histories of their forefathers
-- actually that of the Israelite ancestry -- the Maya propound: called in the Quich chronicles. Then we shall tell all that they did in the light of
existence, in the light of history."
Ta-x-qui tzihoh ronohel ruq x-qui ban chic chi-zaquil qolem zaquil tzih.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos.
Ta-x-qui tzihoh ronohel ruq x-qui ban chic chi-zaquil qolem zaquil tzih
: (tah) point out (8376)
: (see) excellency (7863)
., (qetseh) frontier (7097)
: (haw-ah) existence (1934)
::~ (rinnah) proclamation (7440)
: (el) great (410)
,~ (raq) surely (7535)
: (see) excellent (7863)
: (kee) truly (3588)
:: (ben) son (1122)
: (siyach) tell (7879)
: (see) excellent (7863)
~:: (za-kar) ( r=l ) memorial (2142-8)
:: (khaw-lam) recall (2492)
~:: (za-kar) ( r=l ) remember, memorial (2142-8)
. (tsa-ah) came out (those who) (6627)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: . ~:: :: ~:: : : :: : : ,~ :::~ : ., : :
Ta See Qetseh hawah rinnahel raq see kee ben siyakh see zakar khalam, zakar ts-ah
[ as mentioned previously, they were ytsa (brought forth) from Egypt and slavery ]
Mayan Account:
Ah Rax Lac, the Lord of the Green Plate, or the earth; Ah Rax Tzel the Lord of the Green
Gourd or the Blue bowl, as Ximnez says, meaning the sky.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 78.
:~. ('ares) canopy, arch (6210)
,~ (yaraq) green (3419)
:~. ('ares-ah) canopy, arch (6210) (fem.)
:. (tsal-aw) sky (6763)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ,~ :~. :. :~.
Phonetic: 'ares yaraq ( r=l ahresh-ah tsela )
Meaning: GREEN CANOPY (The jungle) SKY CANOPY (The sky)
Mayan Satan
There was no sun yet, Nevertheless, there was a being called VUCUB-CAQUIX who was
very proud of himself. I shall now be great above all the beings created and formed. I
am the sun, the light, the moon, he exclaimed. Great is my splendor. Because of me men
shall walk and conquer...So VUCUB-CAQUIX spoke. But he was not really the sun; he
was only vainglorious of his feathers and his riches...His only ambition was to exalt
himself and to dominate. - Popol Vuh, Recinos. P. 93.
[internal footnote]: Vucub-Caquix, that is to say, Seven Macaws. Ximnez believed he
saw in this personage a kind of Lucifer, To Brasseur de Bourbourg he was a prince.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 93.
:: (bo-vo) fallen (935)
: (khob) secret, Cherisher, (2243)
hidden bosom
:: (kaw-kash) untrue, lie, deceive (3584)
deal falsly, faithless
Transliteration / Comparison:
Mayan: VU CUB-CAQUIX (Vucub Caquish)
Hebrew: :: : ::
Phonetic: Bukhob Kakhish or: Vukhob kakish
Satan is described in the Bible as a vain (self cherisher) desiring dominance among
men. He is variously called the deceiver, the father of lies, and the prince of darkness. Such
statements as; The way of the wicked is as darkness.. - Proverbs 4:19 "choshek,"
(#2822 ) it means obscurity, as if to hide, it also means wickedness, ignorance, death
and darkness, etc.), clearly point to those who are said to obey Satan. Satan is said to
have fallen (away from grace). All of this it would appear to be caused by a great lack of
faith (faithless) on his part. In other words, all of these epithets have, at one time or
another, been applied to Satan. - i.e. Deuteronomy 33:29, Ha Satan* is called, liar, the
word Kachash is used. He is said to work iniquity in secret or in the dark, and that those
who follow him, do their work in the dark, so as not to be seen by men. So, in general
character Vucub-Caquix fits the character mold of the Biblical Satan, even down to the
express Biblical usage of the exact word Kakash for Satans followers.
* Israels enemies
Lack of Hebrew or Shemitic Grammar.
To a professional linguist, it is immediately apparent that there is little, or no Hebrew
grammar present in these translations. The only answer to this criticism that makes any
sense at all, is that the Mayan form of Shemetic is Creole, or "pidgin" Shemetic, altered over
the millenia to its present decadent form. The loose translations into archaic Spanish done
by Catholic missionaries in the sixteenth century did little to aid in the understanding of
the possibility of a Shemetic origin for Mayan. Many words have obviously changed mean-
ing over the thousands of years involved. As an example; Balam now means Jaguar, but it
was anciently applied to the names of all of the chief Mayan forefathers, they were cer-
tainly not Jaguars. This process occurs in most modern languages. As another example; if a
person is called gay nowadays, that does not mean that he is happy in the least as
was the case 40 or so years ago but rather, one who is a homosexual. If this man was
said to give AYDS ( a dietary supliument) to people that didnt care to be AIDED, we would
have taken an entirely different interpretation of those words.
The original meaning of these words, sadly, has been supplanted by the new usage.
In keeping with this line of thought, the reversal of meaning of phrases, is also potential-
ly present.
Mayan Account:
POPOL VUH - ( Book of the Community)
This tendency to reverse, typical in romance languages - as seen from an English
speakers point of view. appears to have occurred with the title of the most famous and
sacred book of the ancient Maya, The Popol Vuh. According to those who "know" such
things, Popol is supposed to mean community and Vuh is said to mean paper or
book. - Popol Vuh p. 80.
In the context which we presently find ourselves, that is, Shemetic word comparisons, it
becomes apparent, however, that "Popol" originally meant paper, not community. It is
clear that Paparus - the original word for paper, is an Egyptian (Shemetic), cognate. The
English word paper is derived from it, as is the French and German word papier and
the Spanish word Papel, which seems to be precisely the same word as is used by the
Shemetic speaking Maya. Just why Ximenz and Recinos did not see this is quite curious.
Perhaps Ximenz did see it and was quashed, since he alone seems to be the one who
understood the connection or Nexus, between spoken Mayan and The original language
of the world, Adamic-Noachian-Shemetic-Hebrew.
POPOL VUH Historical Mayan book of the community
:~ -~cc (papyr-rus) paper reed, (papel in Spanish ) Egyptian
:~ -:cc (papel-rus) and papier in German and French)
:: (bow - vow) mention, to come, to go (935)
fallen, befell, (the) way
Comparison / Transliteration:
POPOL VUH ( Popol Buh )
Shemetic: :: :cc [ b=v in Hebrew ]
Phonetic: popal ( r )-voe Note: r = l in Egyptian and other spoken Shemetic languages.
Meaning: PAPER ( record ) (of that which) BEFELL (an historical record)
This translation is much more appropriate as a meaning for the words Popol Vuh, one
which seems only too logical, once the Shemetic basis for the Mayan language is discov-
ered. The meaning is still Book (paper) of the Community (history).
Mayan Account:
They passed among some birds and these birds were called MOLAY.
(At least that is what the translator thought the birds were called. In fact the Mayan with
whom he was walking at the time, was not inticating the name of the particular species of
bird, rather the simple fact that it was a flock of birds - over there on the pond. )
[internal footnote]: Molay and its derivatives in Maya mean together, flock, herd,
derived from mol, to gather - Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 140.
:: (maw-law) gatherselves together (4390)
Mayan: MOLAY
Hebrew: ::
Phonetic: Maw-lah
Meaning: TO GATHER TOGETHER ( as a Flock of birds)
Mayan Account:
The old man was called Zaqui-Nim-Ac and the old woman, Zaqui-Nim-Tzis.
[internal footnote]: Zaqui-Nim-Ac, the Great White Wild Boar; Zaqui-Nim-Tzis, the
Great White Coati. The old man and the old woman represent the creator couple who,
under different names, appear throughout the first part of these chronicles.
- Popol Vuh p. 97.
:: (zak-ee) translucent, pure (2134/5) (pl. or possessive gramm.)
~. (tskhar) white (alternate) (6715)
::: (nuwn-n=m) perpetual (5125)
(awkh) wild animal (255)
:: (zak-ee) translucent, pure (2134/5)
-::: (nuwn-h) perpetual (fem.) (5125)
.. (tsiyts) flower (6731ff)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::: ::
Phonetic: Zakee- Nun (m) -Ach
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: .. ::: ::
Phonetic: Zakee- Nunah-Tsiyts
Mayan Account:
There was only immobility and silence in the darkness, in the night. Only the Creator,
the Maker, Tepu Gucumatz the Forefathers.
'E Alom,' literally, those who conceive and give birth, 'e Qaholom,' those who beget
children. In order to follow the conciseness of the text here I translate the two terms as
the Forefathers. " - Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 81.
Note: that it is the authors (Recinos, Goetz, and Morleys) translation of two seperate Mayan phrases, and is not precise,
even though they claim to be "concise." The Mayan text requires that these beings are supernatural, creator deities and
not forefathers in a human sense.
(ee) he (prefix, 3 mas.) Grammatical
:. (al) over, Above, Highest (5920-1)
:. (am) tribe, people, nation, (5971)
folk, men
:: (eloheem) mighty ones (colective plural) (430)
(ee) he (prefix, 3 mas.) Grammatical
: (kah) hitherto, before (3542)
up to this time
:::. (olam) ancient time, beginning (5769)
of time (Ancient of days)
eternal one
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :. :. :: :::. :
Phonetic: ee Al-lam eloaheem ee Kah olam
Meaning: HE (who is) ABOVE MEN (from) BEFORE ANCIENT TIMES
This phraseology fits the Biblical description of Yahweh, the Creator and ELOHYM
(Mighty ones) of Israel, who are called Ancient of Days - Dan. 7:9, 13, 22 and ELO-
HYM in Genesis and throughout the Bible). Even though the Maya used the name Tohil
the concept of two, distinct Creator beings is identical with that of the Hebrew Masoretic
biblical account. The Hopi account has them as uncle and nephew, rather than father and
son, but the similarity is striking. (Elohym, is a Hebrew collective noun or uniplural, which
has been translated into English as god or gods. The duality of the family of Elohym is
clearly seen throughout the Bible, as examples: Let US make man in OUR image. - Gen.
1:26 and Come let US go down and confuse their language -- Gen .11: 5-7-, Then
YAHWEH rained on Sodom and Gommorah brimstone and fire from YAHWEH out of
heaven;" -- Gen. 20:24 and... What is his name and what is his sons name? Surely
you know! -- Proverbs 30:4 - or:... He has spoken to us through a Son, whom he
appointed the heir of all things, THROUGH WHOM HE CREATED THE WORLD. --
Hebrews 1:2 and finally ...and the world was made through him yet the world knew him
not. -- John 1:10 All of this evidence of two, distinct entities in the High Elohym is clear,
even so, it bears no relation to Christian theology of a trinity.
Mayan Account: By nature they were great sages and thinkers.
[internal footnote]: E Nimac etamanel, e nimac ahnoh, in the original.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 82.
: (anee) me, Mine, Myself, which (589)
we, who, I (as for me)
.: (mawg) wisemen (sages) (7248-4018)
("magos) Greek - sorcerer, oriental scientist)
:. (ayth) with, by (854)
:: (tam) integrety (8535-7)
: (awn) withersoever (575)
: (el) great (410)
: (anee) which (589)
.: (mawg) wisemen (sages) (7248-4018)
-:. (ah-yin-oh) thinkers (3 Mas.) (5869)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Phonetic: Anee mag e-tam an-el, anee mag ah-yn-eh
Hebrew: .: : : :: :: : :. .: :
During the conquest of Kanaan by the tribes of Israel, under command of Joshua
(Yahshua) the general, Israel was instructed by Yahweh to drive out all of the inhabitants of
the land, from before them. The kHiwim (Hivites, one of the Kanaanite tribes; actually the
Maya), however, after hearing what Yahshua and all Israel had done to Jerico and Ai:
...they on their part acted with cunning, and went and made ready provisions, and
took worn-out sacks upon their asses, and wineskins worn-out and torn and mended,
with worn-out and patched sandals on their feet, and all their provisions were dry and
moldy. - Joshua 9.
These Kanaanites came to make a covenannt of non-agression with Israel, deceptively
appearing to have come from a great distance, a far country. Israel failed to consult
Yahweh and being thus fooled, made the pact.
The end result was that Israel was forced to live up to this covenant when it was later
learned that these people were in reality, nieghbors and inhabitants of the land of promise,
one of the peoples that the Israelites were to have driven out from before them. The chief-
tans or lords of Israel (Baalym Yakab), however, cursed these people when they found out
that they had been deceived and made slaves of them. The Israelites did not kill them, but
Yahshua made them, hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation and for
the altar of Yahweh. This story is found in the book of - Joshua, chapter 9.
This historical event is of particular interest, because, the Maya claim to have been origi-
nally occupants of the land of chiwym bordering on "Babili" (Babylon), in "Tuln," on the
other side of the sea.* The Maya were these Khiwim (Hivites). This tribe was the very
group of wood hewers and water drawers mentioned in the Biblical account.
* Geotz, Delia, Annals of Totanicapan, 1953 p. 170-181)
In the Popol Vuh, there are references which point to this identification as well. On page
22, - Popol Vuh, Goetz,& Morley, 1977, we read: and they carried water and wood for
their houses. On page 203 we read: Then the tribes all surrendered. The people hum-
bled themselves before Balam Quitze, ( i.e., Joshua **),
Balam Acab (baalym Yacab - Lords of Jacob-"Israel) and Mahucutah. Have pity on us,
do not kill us, they exclaimed. Very well, Although you deserve to die, you shall
[instead] become [our] vassals for the rest of your lives, they said to them.
**"Balam Quitze" is a title applied first to Joseph, then to Moses, and later to Joshua.
It means frontier lord (s)" or, Lords of distant land.
The Popol Vuh story continues to tell of the finish of the conquest, all the tribes being
destroyed. Then they multiplied and increased, on the mountain which in Mayan is called
HACAVITZ, Mountain named after the end of the conquest. - Popol Vuh, p. 203.
(ha) definite article (the) grammatical
:: (kaab) spoil, made sore, pain (3510)
.: (bitsa) finished, fulfill, stop, (1215)
break off, plunder
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: .: ::
Phonetic: Ha-kaab-Bitsa
Meaning: THE SPOILING (plunder) FINISHED.
This can be nothing but the Kanaanite view of the conquest of Palestine by Judah and
Israel under general Yahushua ben Nun, ca 1400-1393 B.C.E.
HACAVITZ - CHIPAL , Destination city where they unwrapped the bundle containing
Josephs bones [Pisom CaCagal]. - Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 205 nt. 3.
:: (kaab)
.: (bitsa)
:c: (shephal) Humble, subdue, put down (8214-17)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Phonetic: ha-kab-bitsa - shephal
Hebrew: :c: .: ::
The land of Kanaan was now under the dominance and possession of the tribes of Israel.
The wars of conquest were over and the enemy driven out, killed and otherwise subdued.
The only tribe remaining was the tribe of the kHiwym ( kHwym ) who later became the
"Mayans." These Kanaanites were vassals of Israel and later influenced Israel to worship
pagan idols.
Israel the Land of "Talal"
The promised land of Palestine/Israel is, in fact, called Talal in Ezekiel 17:24 meaning;
loftyor eminent. The later, Norse, home of the Hebrew tribe of Dan (Scan-Dan), was
called Thule, from the Hebrew cognate, also apparently meaning eminent home of the
gods. Fifteenth century Mexican, Cempoalan, Tlaxcallan and Azteca tribesman called the
Spaniards Teules, whom they thought to be the red/blond bearded, white god Kukulcn
(2nd century Norse Votan) returning as promised. The word, Teules, meant gods.
Therefore: such words as; Tule, Thule, Tuln, Tolan, -Tlan, Az-tln and Tula are inter-relat-
ed words, corresponding to the Shemetic word talal meaning eminent. These words refer
to the ancient homeland in the near-east (talal), as well as the Norse homeland (Thule),
and subsequently (Az-tln) the Tolteca home in the north.
Tuln = Ancestral land [of the gods] on the other side of the sea, mentioned in all of the
Mayan Titulos.
::: ( taw-lal ) eminent (8524) ( see Ezekiel 17:23 )
( an ) where, whthersoever ( 575 )
In Ezekiel 17:23 the nation of Israel is likened to a tree planted on a high and lofty
( ::: = Talal ) mountain. Here we see the identical analog made by the Mayans which is
presented in the Bible.
Aztln Ancient, Tolteca home in the north. Probably the Mound builder areas of North
America. (see Discovery of Ancient America, pp. 56-59 for Tallegewi- the name of the
mound builders, and the direct relationship to the Hebrew words tely gy- . :: meaning
nation of mounds). This area was suddenly vacated by the Talli-gewi, shortly before the
Tolteca arrival in central Mexico. Tol-Techa Tol-teca, in Hebrew means mound camp.
The connection is a strong one, supported by archaelogical evidence cited above. ( D.A.A.)
AZTLN Aztln, is the Tolteca homeland in the north
Aztln then, must very well correspond to the claim that the ancient homeland of the
Tolteca was indeed, an eminent land of the gods. They must have viewed it that way, as
the Israelites viewed Palestine. The eminent land of Yahweh, the true and only mighty one
of the universe, the creators chosen land and people.
Therefore: Aztln, the ancient Tolteca land to the north of Mexico, from which they came,
presumably refers as well, to their own pre-eminence among the nations. They were, obvi-
ously pre-eminent above the Maya.
: (az) mighty, strong, fierce (5794)
::::: (too-loone) eminent, elevate, pile up (8436-8524 -575)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: AZTLN
Phonetics: ahz to-loon
Hebrew: ::::: :
Meaning: MIGHTY (land) OF EMINENCE
In this authors book, Discovery of Ancient America (pp. 59ff), a comparison of
Aztln to Atln-tis; the great continentout in the Atlantic Ocean is made.
Atlantis/Aztln was found west of Europe, from the Pillars of Hercules (Straits of
Gibralter) - from which land, and the Atlantic Ocean itself is named - and after a voyage of
many days one arrives at an island ( continent) which is larger than Lybia (Africa) and
Asia ( Asia Minor). In Greek, the words for island and continent are the same. Were
one to hold a globe of the earth in his hand as he reads Platos words, he can not help to
see that the Atlantis continent, which was a voyage of many days west of Europe, was
and still is, North and South America. This becomes clearer when one studies an ocean
floor map of the Atlantic and realizes there has never been any land between the two conti-
nents- east to west. The Atlantic Ocean Basin is a granitic vacuity, floored by now-cooled
basaltic magma, created by the spreading of the continents, which at one time interfaced
and connected at the mid-Atlantic spreading center ridge system. No continent there.
- The various works of Plato, Timaeus. Strabo, 1:3:2. Diodorus, 5:19;1-5. and
Aristotle, Minor Works on Marvelous Things Heard , 84, p 271.
-The Day Behemoth and Leviathan Died - David Allen Deal, Kherem La Yah Press
Wynnewood, OK, 1999.
Now we come to the evidence for the ancient tribal name of the Maya ( Maya is a new
apellation for them since coming to the new world, a name which reflects their penchant for
numbers and astrology ). But the Maya still knew their ancient name and it is well attest-
ed to in the various Mayan titulos such as the Popol Vuh. That name:
cHIVIM-Tuln, (cHIWIM-Tuln), ZIVAN-Tuln, CIVAN-Tuln are several of the various,
modern representations of the name for the ancestral homeland of the Maya. It is also
known as The land of seven caves, or ravines - Popol Vuh p. 62 and others.
It is this appellation cHiwim that is of interest here. The ancient Mayan tribal name
derives from its Shemetic cognate : kHwah ( :) then add the (:) ym plural suffix
or :: kHywym and you have a correct group or tribal rendering of the name. This is
the name of the Biblical tribe of Canaanites known as Hivites, or more properly, the
"kHiwym." The first Hebrew letter of this famous biblical name( ), as we have previous-
ly stated, carries the approximate sound of a gutteral (kh or ch), similar to the sound one
makes when clearing his throat ( whistling frictive ). Hence my non-standard usage of the
(kH) which is a Hebrew keth and is represented in English as an H with a lower case
k preceeding it. i.e. kH). We have no similar letter/sound value in English.
: (khweh) crevice in the earth (2337)
:~: (khaw-rawn) cavern or cave (2362)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: kHYWYM
Phonetic: chawern
Hebrew: :~: :
Please note that the Hebrew letter w (waw) w has become v (vav) in very modern times, thus the word would
now be rendered Chavern an obvious cognate derived from ancient Shemetic and now used in English and Spanish
cueva cave, and caverna cavern.
This paleo-Mayan name for their ancient homeland on the other side of the Atlantic
Ocean, from whence the sun rises, is a clear reference to a land of caves and caverns.
This fabled land of kHiwym-Tuln, bordering on Babili (the Babylonians) is none other
than ancient Palestine. Ancient Palestine also identified by the Maya as Kana and Jo
Balam Kana (ie. biblical land of Canaan) clearly did border on the territory of the ancient
Babylonians, where there were Troglodyte cities such as Petra and others. There is even
biblical mention of Israelites hiding in and living in the caves and caverns of the country,
(eg.-- I Sam. 13:6, I kings 18:4, Judges 6:2, Gen. 19:30, Josh. 10:16).
Correct identification of the historical, tribal origins of the Maya is possible if one allows
the historical record to speak for itself. Our academic Maya historical specialists are very
disinclined, even loath, to do so; as has been demonstrated by private communication with
this researcher already cited. The internal histories of the Mayan documents are only
acceptable to them, within their own theoretical, contextual setting, as an isolated com-
munity, developed on its own, here in the paleo-Americas, with no connections to our
western civilization or its cradle, the middle east, at any time during its development.
The identification of the Maya with the Canaanite tribe of Hivites is extremely easy, once
we are willing to accept the written Mayan record over the modern theoretical one. The
academics are guilty of hypocracy here. They, on one hand, would have the native
American populations stand against diffusionism, claiming, You noble peoples, developed
all of your ancient technology, isolated, here in the Americas, on your own, with no trans-
Atlantic contacts! Yet are unwilling to give the slightest credence to the historical accounts of
trans-Atlantic origins by these same Maya! What sleight-of-hand The hypocracy and lie
here is that the academics would exclude the ancient sea-faring Maya from any connection
with the omphalos or old center of civilization where the great ideas of civilization developed
and would gladly take from them the very naval expertise that they, as Phonicians, most
certainly possesed to get them here to Quuich in the first place.
CHIVIN = Mayan ancestral land on the other side of the sea,
- Fair Gods and Stone Faces, Irwin, p. 100. Also:
Civan-Tuln, from the other part of the sea, where the sun rises, bordering on Babili.
[Babylon], - Popol Vuh, Goetz and Morley, 1953, p. 170.
Variously translated as: Civan, Zivan, chivan, Sivan, etc.
:: (khiwym) Hivites - occupants of Canaan (2340)
: (eem) (plural suffix)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Phonetic: kHiwym [ NOTE: "ch," z," "s," & "c," equal kH ( ) ; v = w & n=m ]
Hebrew: ::
Meaning: HIVITES (Ancient, Shemetic-speaking, cHametic peoples of Canaan)
Now Votn is said to have departed from the land of Chivim is known, the
Phoenicians said of themselves that they came from the land of Canaantes
- Constance Irwin Fair Gods and Stone Faces, Constance Irwin, p. 100.
We know that... The Hivites lived in the land of Cannan... - Exodus 3:17.
Mayan Account: From the west we came to Tuln...from the other side of the sea, and
it was in Tuln where we were engendered and given birth by our mothers and fathers
( quoted from The Memorial de Solol o Tecpn Atitln...- Popol Vuh, Recinos. p. 63 )
Tulan is the ancient homeland, a fabled place, on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, if
we are to take the Mayn account seriously. Of course, the sea being mentioned here is
not the Atlantic Ocean, but the Red sea ( Yam Suph ) which was crossed in an easterly
direction, with the fabled land of Tulan ( Israel ) as a goal.
Israelite Account:
The Israelites, whose story the Maya assimilated over years of contact, did indeed arrive
in Canaan (Tuln) after crossing the sea, from the west in a northeasterly direction from
Egypt. - Exodus.
To the Maya, Chiwim (kHiwym) was in the fabled land of Tuln. Votn as we shall
see, later in this work, actually came from another famous land of Tuln (Thule) in
Scandanavia. The Mayan account indicates that there were four Tulns:
From four places the people came to Tuln. In the east is one Tuln; another in
Xibalbay; and another where god is. Therefore, there were four Tulns, Oh our sons! So
they said. From the west we came to Tuln, from across the they told us.
- The Annals of the Cakchiquel [s], p. 45.
Please note; three Tulns are delineated in the explanation, therefore they must be:
excluding the Tuln being referenced in the first sentence.
Xibalbay, the first, is the cave region of Palestine/Canaan where the Maya had lived
in large caverns. Photos of these caverns are shown on pages 48 & 49 The underground
deity legends grew from this ancient association in the Tuln of Palestine. A modern
Academic from Mexico believes that a recently discovered tunnel under the great Pyramid
of the Sun at Teotihuacan, with seven rooms, is this fabled land of seven caves, Chiwym
Tuln, from which the Maya originally sprang. He ignores the other important and obvi-
ous data from the Popol Vuh, that this much fabled place had existed on the other side of
the sea, far from Mexico!
Xibalbay is also understood by Mayanologists to be a real place, rather than a mytho-
logical one. True, the place had attained mythological significance to the Quich, but was
and yet is, in fact, a real area of caverns in the land of Tuln ( to be precise, Palestine ).
- Popol Vuh, Recinos, p. 114, ftnt 6.
One where god is appears to be cosmological, in heaven, so to speak, and the second
In the east is one Tuln. This must be Thule (Scandanavia) to which place Votn, the
red-bearded man-/god/king/priest of the Maya departed from Mexico, promising to return.
If this is the third "Tuln," and it seems appropriately so, because the Tuln in
Scandanavia, cannot be the same as the "Tuln" in Xibalaby. Votn was seen as a man-
god, and Scandanavia, his home, was called by the Norse, "Thule." Therefore it also may
be seen as the Tuln in heaven. It is from this Tuln/Thule whence he emerged and to
where he subsequently returned. Votn, most certainly, was an historical figure of the
third-century C.E. We shall discuss these details of this individual, his importance to
Mexican history and legend later in this work.
This piece of important information helps confirm the mistaken identity of
Quetzalcoatl-Kukulcn-Votn made by the Aztecs (under lord Moctezuma) at Corts
arrival in Mexico in 1519. Both the Tlaxcalans and the Aztecs, at first, believed that
Hernando Corts, along with his retinue of half-horse-half-man, white-gods (Gothic
Spanish soldiers) who accompanied him, was the fulfillment of the ancient, foretold return
Quetzalcoatl-Kukulcn-Votn who in the third century C.E. had sailed away to Tuln,
( Tule ), promising someday to return, but never having done so, having died in that land.
This is demonstrated by the name that the Aztecs and Tlaxcalans called the Spaniards.
They called them Tules meaning gods. This will be documented later under the section
about Kukulcn. For the time being, simply recall that Scandanavia was anciently called
Thule, (Ultima Thule)* by the natural confusion of the ancient Maya homeland
cHiwym-Tuln in the land of Canaan, with the Norse Tule-Tuln, from which place,
hundreds of years later, sprang Sigge, son of Frizdulph,** Votn, the white-faced, red
bearded man-god of the Maya (ca. 250 CE), we can now understand the previous com-
Now Votn is said to have departed from the land of Chivim... no Chivim is known, the
Phoenicians said of themselves that they came from the land of Canaan"
- Fair Gods and Stone Faces, p. 100.
* Called so by the Greek Pythias in his record of travels to the previously unknown northern lands.
Scan Dan in Hebrew means Dans Home. This testifies to the heritage of those people.
** Brewers Classical Dictionery of Phrase and Fable p. 908
Most assuredly, we have demonstrated in this work, that cHiwym is in the land of
Canaan! Votn merely came from another of the Tulns which later Maya assumed was
the same Tuln as cHiwym-Tuln, but in reality was the Thule Tuln of the Norse.
Tula, in Mexico, may be the fourth Tuln, however, Az-Tuln in the north, of the Tolteca,
may well be the actual fourth Tuln. We cannot say for a certainty, but both are possible
In 1861 the Popol Vuh, Le livre Sacre, which contains the Quich text of the
Manuscript of Chichicastenango was published in Paris, divided into chapters and pho-
neticized according to Brasseur de Bourbourgs ideas, in order to facilitate its reading by
the people of his country (France). According to these ideas, the Abbe (de Bourbourg)
introduced the letter k which does not exist in the original, and substituted it for the c
and the q which Ximnez used in transcribing the Quich manuscript. On the other
hand, he kept the V which was used in the Colonial Period to represent the sound of
U as in the words varal (uaral) and vinac (uinac), etc.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos, pp. 55-56.
We justifiably add to the list the word Civan or zivan (chiuan). In Hebrew these let-
ters, "v" & "u" did not exist except as "w." Therefore we correctly write...cHiwim. Actually
the "i" and the "y" are also directly interchangable, because in Hebrew there is no "i," and
the "n," and "m" are many times interchanged. Ergo: Chiwin which was Constance Irwins
translation, is also cHiwym.
Finally we have demonstrated the genesis of this Shemetic name cHiwym, the true
name of the Hivites. Also, from this, we might detect how various translators have arrived
at such renderings as Civan, cHivan, and although in English, Zivan is a bit of a
phonetic stretch, c and z are sometimes confused particularly in Abbe, Brasseur de
Bourbourg's language, French ( do you zee what I mean? ). After all, French, was Mssr.
de Bourbourgs tongue of choice with which to translate the Popol Vuh.
Anciently no v existed in any language; it is an invention of 16-17th century Europe.
In Shemetic languages such as Phoenician, Hebrew and Aramaic, properly, it was a w
(waw) [the sound of uu]. cHivim is impossible in any ancient context. It is more correct-
ly written cHiwim. The first letter of this word is a keth or gutteral letter ( ). This
carries a sound somewhat like kh or ch with a proper gutteral aspiration not used in
English - a little like goughing up phlegm. The sound of the letter k is also an approxi-
mate English value. Therefore, cHivim is: kHiwym. The land of kHiwym is certainly
known. Al that is needed is accurate knowledge of the original biblical tongue.
kHiwym: Tribal name of the Maya in their original land.
: (khivee) (khiwee anciently) (2340)
one of the aboriginal tribes
of Palestine (Canaan)
[known as Hivites in English]
: ( eem) collective noun ending - suffix.
:: Collective proper Noun (Tribal Name)
Israelite Account:
Note: the cHivites (kHiw-ym) settled among the Israelites in Palestine as gatherers of
wood and bearers of water after having deceived the Israelites -Joshua 9:1ff.
The kHiwym were literal descendants of Canaan and lived in his land, as may be noted
in, I Chronicles 1:15. It was in this position, dwelling, as they did, among the Israelites that
they finally led the Israelites into the worship of Bel (Baal) the principal god of the
Canaanites. These people were singularly infamous for sacrificing their own children in
times of national stress. It is also true that the Maya sacrificed their children (see
"Tlachiualtopetl" this book page 95). Also it may be seen in Judges, 5:17, that Dan, an
Israelite tribe, not only possessed maritime technology, but were criticized for remaining in
their ships, and refusing to fight with their brother Israelites against their Canaanite
friends with whom they later traveled from their ancient, and eminent (Tuln/Palestine)
homeland to the New World of the Americas, called variously, Aztln, Quich, Meshi-
ko (later to become Mexico).
Mayan account:
And they carried water and wood for their houses note 40. Breve y Sumaria
Relacin de los Seores de la Nueva Espaa - Popol Vuh, Recinos. p.22.".
Based on the Mayan name for themselves, kHiwym, and their own historical docu-
ments, we are left with no other possibility but to identify them with the ancient, Canaanite
tribe of Hivites (kHiwy - kHiwym). This is their true identity.
The Maya, known by their ancient tribal name, the cHiwym, were the original
Troglodytes, or cave dwellers of Palestine. We have merely to note some of the examples
of giant caves of that country, now called Eretz Israel, to see that many of these giant
caverns are suitable to house entire villages.
Giant Caves in
Giant caverns near Lacish, large enough to hold a triblal encampment or village.
- Photos Charles Runfola
Hermits caves in the cliffs of Kedron. It may be rightly said that Palestine is a land of
caves. This fact may be seen from this series of beautiful line drawings from the turn of
the nineteenth century.
Mayan Account:
Nu zivan cul, my ravine, or the narrow ravine. Cu zuivan, Narrow, close ravine,
but the underground caves in Verapaz and the Petn are ALSO CALLED ZIVAN.
[ literally Chiwym ] - Popol Vuh ftnt. 6, Recinos, p. 114.
:: (nuu) we, our grammatical prefix
:: (chiwym) already demonstrated as correct
form of zivan.
:: (kala) restricted (ie narrow) (3607)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: NU ZIVAN CUL ( "zivan" is through the French attempt at cH )
Hebrew: :: :: ::
Phonetic: nu-chiwym-kala
This evidence is unequivocal. Not only is the land of Palestine/Canaan/Israel a land of
caverns, as the photographs and old drawings testify, but also because of the historical evi-
dence related by the Maya, through such books as the Popol Vuh, parallel the biblical
accounts which came to us by other routes, and ultimately because the Mayan language
has a great number, if not all, demonstrably Shemetic cognates. We can now see that
Palestine is most certainly the land from which sprang the ancient Maya/cHiwim.
Most assuredly, this ancient land Tuln (emminence) is also the biblical land of
emminence, Palestine, from which also sprang the traditions of the three major world
religions; Judahism, Christianity, and Islam.
The MAYA Numerologists
"Time.... Maya priests of the Classic Period likened it to an endless procession of
gods who were really numbers. These beings walked their eternal trail bent low by
heavy loads that pulled their trumplines hard against their prespiring foreheads. The
burdens - great animals and birds - were gods too, the patrons of certain days or multi-
ples of days. This awesome procession moved through the Maya eternity in careful
mathematical order."
- The Mysterious Maya - An Age of Splendor , George E. Stuart p. 37.
The Maya people we now understand, were involved with numbers to the point of reli-
gious obsession. Each day to the Maya was a god, corresponding to a precise mathematical
calendric system.
To infer then, that theirs was a religion devoted to numerology, having a religious
obssession with numerals, is not farfetched. So, obviously their name Maya comes into
question. We shall examine it in the light of our Shemitic postulation.
: (mayah) a prime numeral, (3967)
a hundred, also a
multiplicative and a
fraction hundred: (-fold) having to do with numbers
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: MAYA
Hebrew: :
Phonetic: maiyah
Meaning: NUMEROLOGISTS (figurative)
It should be obvious now, to even the most casual observer, that there is a linguistic
connection between the ancient Mayan and other Middle eastern Shemetic speaking peo-
ples. Clearly, the Maya were not Hebrew, nor were they Shemetic in the least, neither were
they the Lost Tribes of Israel. The fact that these Kanaanite- kHametic peoples spoke
Shemetic, is the reason that linguists have confused the origins of the Phoenician /
Kanaanite / Carthaginians as being Shemetic.
This is somewhat akin to calling contemporary Afro-Americans "Anglo-Saxons," merely on
the basis of their present language. Eubonics, not being considered, however, were one to
think about it a little - Eubonics, is a close comparison to the present posit - the muta-
tion of any language when a natural or atrtifical separation has been created.
Mayan / Hebrew-Shemitic word comparisons:
Here begins a list of Mayan/Hebrew words, some of which have been analyzed in
Discovery of Ancient America. With the notable exception of Kukulcn, whose name had
been translated incorrectly, but due to subsequent information that came to light after the
publication date, that was corrected. No other changes have been found necessary in the
several years, since the original research and publication of that book.
This is just a beginning. The future of Maya and Mayan language studies should be
affected by this information. Whether or not it has any effect remains to be seen. If the
hard-core academics prevail, then knowledge will suffer, but eventually the truth will over-
come all prejudice. The trouble is we probably won't be here to enjoy that hour. It is, how-
ever, comforting to know the outcome beforehand.
Traditional historians have neither seen this fact nor are willing to embrace the possibili-
ty of its veracity. Must we wait for this generation of self-serving authoritarians to die
before the truth may be looked upon by all?
The underlying reasons are obvious to one who studies the problem. The basis for all
studies in this modern world is evolution. If the premise can be shown false the entire
system must collapse. This is unacceptable to those in power, so the charade continues for
a time. Even this will pass, and some day people will be allowed to know the truth. When
this occurs, we will be truly free; but certainly not until then.
Kukumatz = Mayan king, mentioned throughout the Mayan Titulos.
: ( ko) here (3541)
:::: (koo-mawz) (a) jewel (3558)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Phonetic: KO KOO-MAZ
Hebrew: :::: :
Meaning: A JEWEL HERE (with us)
According to the Maya, their ruling class was "white-faced," not brown-skinned as
was the peasantry. These white faced rulers, the original "Quich Maya," were driven
off by warfare with their brown-skinned subjects.
The Maya claim:
"Anciently a great lord from the province of Yucatn had gone there and made
these edifices, and that after a few years he returned alive to his land, and left it
vacant." - Quechean Civilization, Carmack, p. 127.
Shemetic is the oldest language in the world. It could very well be called Noahic, or
even Adamic, to carry the hypothesis back even farther in time, because it is named
for Shem, the son of Noah, who was the ninth lineal descendant from Adam. It is for
this reason that its influence is felt even to this day in many of the present languages.
One group of cHametic peoples, descendants of the man cHam and of a totally different
stock from that of the Israelites, who were Shemetic (descendants of Shem), spoke a
language virtually identical to these Hebrews, but physically, looked not a bit like the
Shemites. They were, instead, light brown, black and red-skinned, as the Egyptians
painted them. The Egyptians, who were there, accurately represented them as may be
seen in Figure A- following page. Conversely, the Egyptians depicted the (Israelite)
Amu types in Palestine as what we would now call "northern Europeans." This later
type became the dominant one in Palestine (Amuru, "Retenu") after the Canaanites
were driven out into the world, to become Carthaginians, or to settle in diverse loca-
tions.* Cultural dissimilarities are apparent, such as architectural superiority of the
conquerers (Israel and Judah) , and the abolishment of infanticide for religious rea-
sons, which was prevalent and so pervasive in the Phoenician culture that their very
name is most probably derived from this hideous practice, that is,"Phonos" or (murder-
er) in Greek. ** It is assumed that the name "Phoenician" came from the fact that these
Tyrinians and Sidonians dealt in red/purple dye, however this seems to be a less likely
story. The Amu type (Hebrew), as may be seen in Figure B, is a totally different family
stock of the Canaanite type. ( see following page ).
It is from these two, racially different families of man that the ancient history of the
Maya Indians emerges. The white-skinned, priest class dominating the subjugated,
dark-skinned peoples, but, all speaking one language; to the total confusion of the
"modern" linguists and historians; that language is Shemetic.
To prove these alluded to connections we have only three avenues by which to tra-
verse, we shall follow all of these paths. The first will be linguistic, the second will be
historic parallels, which we have already examined, and thirdly we will view archaeo-
logical evidence.
Figure A Phoenician -Kanaanite type. Figure B Amu Shemitic Israelite type.
Bust from life of King Herod, an Amu, Israelite -Edomite Hebrew,
showing the so-called Caucasian type. This Hebrew face would fit
better in Saxon Germany or England. Think about the implications.
Quetzalcoatl The Feathered Serpent.
"QUETZALCOATL...He was the white man, wearing a long beard, who came from the
east; and who, after presiding over the golden age of Anhuac, disappeared as mysteri-
ously as he had come, on the great Atlantic Ocean. As he promised to return at some
future day, his reappearance was looked for with confidence by each succeeding gener-
ation." -History of the Conquest of Mexico...Prescott, page 695.
Note: Anhuac is a Tolteca name, and Quetzal-coatlis another name for Kukkulcan.
The blond, bearded, white-skinned Scandanavian-Danite,man-god," king of the Norse
and high priest, called Votan by his Norse subjects, became Votn of the Tolteca and Maya,
and was later handed down to the Azteca, as a "man-god " who, according to legend,
arrived in Quich ( Hebrew -distant frontier shore ), or now commonly called
MesoAmerica in a wizard skiff( magician's boat- dragon boat ). In religious legend, he
is a benevolent man-god, symbolized in architecture by a feathered serpent and is called
"Quetzal-coatl." The name/title Quetzal-coatl has come to mean "feathered serpent,"
although this was not the original meaning of the words, nor was it his name, neither was
it his title.
As we shall see, he was variously called "Votn" by the Maya, which was his Norse title
as high priest of Votan ( Wodin - Odin ) also "Kukulcn," (a more ancient title held by his
predicessor in the near east ), and "Dan, ( due to his Israelite tribal name ), and most
QUETZAL-COATL, [Kukulcn-Votn] Tolteca king, White-skinned, red-bearded Man-
God who came from the Atlantic Ocean, and left as he came on a Wizard Skiff.
- The Mysterious Maya p. 97, - Popol Vuh, pp. 11,12, 69, 87 - History of the Conquest of
Mexico and Peru, Prescott. pp. 38, 159, 262, 166, 39, 171, 361, 500,
., (kay-tseh) uttermost frontier, (7097)
distant shore
: (ale) mighty one - god [sic] (410)
.:, (ko-ah) cutting off (6970)
:: (tale) strength (8510)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: .:, :.,
Phonetic: kay-tseh al ko-ah tale
Was the Nrse high priest/king Votan ever Banished from Scandanavia?
Yes. In the 3rd century A.D. Norse, "man-god" Votan of Thule (Scandanavia) was ban-
ished for ten years, after which protracted time he returned to Thule.*
* This information is to be found in the famous Viking Yinglinga Saga by Snorri Snurlson.
Slightly more than a thousand years later, Hernando Corts and his men, whom the
natives thought was Quetzal-coatl and retinue returning as prophecied, were called,
"TULES." [gods] by Tlazcalans and Aztecas, - Discovery and Conquest of Mexico, Bernal
Diaz del Castillo, pp. 72, 140, 132, 133, 158
Mayan Account:
Balaalm Akab is mentioned in most of the Mayan Titulos as the principle forefather from
ancient times. He is usually listed with Majucotaj and Iqui Balaam. These are both, seem-
ingly singular names of individuals, but as we shall see, one Majucotaj is a title of a man,
and the other Iqui Baalam is the name of a mass of tribes, a nation.
Balam Ak'ab "Mayan" forefather(s), mentioned in all of the Mayan Titulos involved in
the ancient events on the other side of the sea in Tuln.
- Quichan Civilization, pp. 273, 287.
:: (baalym) lord (s) (1168)
::. (aw-kab) supplanter (Yacob- (6117)
sur-named "Israel")
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::. :::
Phonetic: baalym aw-kab
Meaning: NOBLES( LORDS) - (of) YAKOB (Israel)
Mayan Account:
Balam Ak'ab Colob, group of people of the Ak'ab branch of the Quich.
- Titulo C'oyoi, p. 26, Carmack, p. 330 nt. 135.
::: (ba'alym) lords (s) (1168)
:,. (aw-kab) Yacob (Israel) (6117)
:: (khay-leb) choicest (chosen) (2459)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: :,. :::
Phonetic: ba'alym aw-kab khay-leb
Meaning: LORDS (of) YAKOB (Israel), CHOSEN ONES
(There is little need to point out that Israel and Judah were called the chosen people)
Mayan Account: SACOROWACH = White-faced ruling class of the Quich,
- Quichean Civilization, Carmack, p. 307 nt. 3.
~. (tsakhor) white (6715)
:~ (roo-akh) spirit-priest (7218-7307)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :~ ~.
Phonetic: tsakhor roo-akh
Meaning: WHITE (MAN-) GODS (Hebrew-Tolteca overlords).
Mayan Account: Balam Quitz (Qetseh) = principal Mayan "forefather" mentioned
throughout the various Mayan Titulos.
::: (ba'alym) lords (1168)
., (kay-tseh) frontier, (7079)
outmost coast
(quarter-shore) outside - uttermost part
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ., :::
Phonetic: ba'alym kay-tseh
Mayan Account: MIXTAM-PON, incense for the dead, suggests it was an incense burned
in honor of MICTAN AJAW, the Quich god of the underworld.
- Popol Vuh, Recinos. 1953 p. 197 nte. 306.
: (maw) wherewith (4100)
: (eesh) man (male entity) (Maya X = sh) (377)
:: (tome) integrity, upright (8537)
perfect, innocence
:c (pane) castout, pass away (6435-37)
go away, lie
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :c :: : :
Phonetic: maw eesh tome pan
MICTAN AJAW: Quich god of the underworld. (Ibid.)
,: (mak) vanish, consume (4716-43)
away, dissolve
:: (tome) upright (one) (8537)
: (az-aw) to kindle, or heat (228)
(therefore, burn)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :: ,:
Phonetic: mak tome az-aw
KINDLE (the incense), CONSUME AWAY (the) UPRIGHT ONE'S (spirit)
Mayan Account:
CHAC, Mayan rain god - The Mysterious Maya pp. 100, 101.
.: (shaw-ag) rumble, moan, (7580)
mightly roar
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: CHAC
Hebrew: .:
Phonetic: shaw-ag
Hebrew meaning: THUNDER (signifing approaching rain)
Mayan Account:
CHAC-MOOL, Vengeful, Shemetic appearing (at least non-Maya looking), version of rain
god, holding in his lap an altar for placement of a warm, palpatating sacrifical, human
heart. - The Mysterious Maya, p 87, 88, 97.
.: (shaw-ag) rumble, moan (7580)
mightly roar
::: (mool) destroy god-ward (4135)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::: .:
Phonetic: shaw-ag mool
Meaning: DESTROYER RAIN GOD (requiring human sacrifice )
Mayan Account:
The Chosen people: The Titulo C'oyoi proclaims that the "Mayan" (Israelite) forefathers
were a "Beloved people" - Quechean Civilization, p. 288, who, after these wanderings
arrived at "JO BALAM K'ANA...they stayed there a while and they did (things), there they
passed time..." ( Ibid. p.289 ). And finally, they arrived in Quich (Guatamala).
- Ibid. p.305.
(Yah) Yah (Yahweh) (3050)
: : (ba'al) lord, husband (1167)
:. (am) people (5972)
.:: (kaw-naw) Kanaan -land (3665) ( prime root )
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: .:: :.::
Phonetic: Yah ba'al am K'ana
Meaning: YAH HUSBANDS (his) PEOPLE (in) KANAAN (land)
The Story of Sinhue calls Israel "the wonderful land of Yah" The prophet Hosea, speaking
of Yahweh and his people states: ( Hosea 3: v.19 ): "I will betroth you (Israel and Judah)
to me forever." That his people are considered "beloved," read: "For you are a people holy to
Yahweh your mighty one; Yahweh your mighty one has chosen you to be a people for his
own possession, out of all the peoples that are on the face of the earth."
- Deuteronomy. 7:6.
Whether or not the reader believes this, is not at question here. The concept is an
established historical, literary and religious one, which needs not be believed. It is a fac-
tual statement to say, that the Israelites have been considered the Chosen people, since
the time of the Exodus and even before. We are merely comparing literary statements from
widely diverse peoples, separated by millenia and an oecan besides.
ELAHOM ( Elohym )
Mayan Prayer: "The Mayan word for prayer or suplication is Elahic, the substantive
form is ELAHOM" - Popol Vuh, Recinos, p. 178, ftnt. 7.
[The substantive expresses existence. Having substance. Real, rather than apparent. For
example: the verb "to be" - I am a descriptive title/name for Yahweh in the Bible.
: : ( eloah-yk ) your mighty one (430) (-yk) grammatical suffix
:: (elohym) mighty one (s) (430)
to whom one prays
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: ELAHOM ( Elohym )
Hebrew: ::
Phonetic: elohym
Meaning: MIGHTY ONES (usually translated as God or gods in English Bibles)
Mayan Account: The Fathers were "ILOCAB" (no translation given, - Quechean
Civilization. p. 35.
:: (yaw-lak) prosperous (3212)
: (ab) fathers (2)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: ILOC -AB
Hebrew: : ::
Phonetic: yaw-lak ab
Upon receiving the land of Kanaan - up until the kingdom of David and Solomon -
Israel's fame was great; as a prosperous nation. Even the Egyptian/Ethiopian queen Hat-
Sheb-Sut (Sheba), had to make a pilgrimage to see for herself. She duly recorded the trip
and came away with an offspring of Solomon. Ethiopians still lay claim to Judah through
this union -- even though its result was an illegitimate son. - Ages in Chaos, p. 103-177
"TAM-UB," Mayan forefather group - Quechean Civ. Carmack p. 31.
:: (tam) upright, pious, (8535)
gentle, dear
: (ab) fathers (2)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: TAM-AB
Hebrew: : ::
Phonetic: taam ab
In GUATEMALA, all Mayan cities had "high places" ( small pyramids ) for worship as
did Israel.
:. (ge-wah) proud, pride (1466)
:: (tam) upright, pious, (8535)
dear, gentle
:.: (mah-al-aw) high place, (4068-9)
mounting up, stairs
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :.: :: :.
Phonetic: gew-wah- tam- mal-aw
The foregoing word "Guatemala, either refers to the mounting up of stairs, to the places
of worship, or the country itself. As to Israel's high places which were all torn down, see -
Jeremiah, 19:5, Micah 1:5.
This is a brief section of the Titulo C'OYOI, in which the beginning of the account of the
forefathers is discussed. It is the opening statement quoted directly from the Quich text.
wacamic chupam ... so ruc junab (1) ... tiquiba - winabe tzij (2)
- Quechean Civilization, Carmack p. 273. English translations from Carmack:
Today at ... in the year(1) ... (we) begin here the first account (2) of the existence
...(of the fathers) and the Grandfathers. - Ibid p. 287.
"(1) date torn away from the document" - Ibid p.307.
"(2) literal translation "talk" or "speak" - Ibid p. 307.
: (oo) and
(ak) surely (389)
,:. ('amaq) profound (6009)
::: (shuwb) recollections (7725)
:. (am) nation (5971)
,~:: (soreq) choice, vintage (8321)
:: (yowm) days (agone), year (s) (3117)
unit of time, age
: (ab) forefather (1)
: (t'ah) to designate (8376)
:. (gabahh) excellency (1362)
: (oo) and
.:: (naba') utter (speak) (5042)
. (tseda) truth (6656)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: . .::: :. : : :: ,~:: :. ::: ,:. :
Phonetic: W-ak-amaq shuwb-am soreq yome-ab ta-gabah w-naba tseda
TRUTH - in perfect creolized Shemitic.
Note: the consecutive ( : ) waw ( meaning "and" ), is a "Hebraism" that indicates a
time sequence ( not a conjunction ), is used twice in this sentence. Much of the Bible was
written with this grammatical device which usually begins a sentence and thought.
As regards the Shemetic grammar, the writer of Titulo C'oyoi appears to be more educat-
ed than the writer of the Popol Vuh. The Popol Vuh is written more in a creolized, or pid-
gen form, such as: "Long-time-no-see," lacking suffixes and prefixes and much grammar.
As we begin to look at this Titulo we see a differing, less degenerated style of Shemetic
writing among the Maya.
The forefathers are listed in the Popol Vuh and in the Titulo C'oyoi. They always appear
in a grouping and usually in this order:
Since by now we see that these have to do with the Israelite forefathers, rather than
Maya, it would be appropriate to analyze these names in Hebrew.
:.: (ba'al) lord (1167-8)
: (am) nation (5971)
., (qetseh) cut-off (7096)
::.: (ba'alym) lords (nobles) (1167-8)
:,. ('aqab) supplant, Yakob (Israel) (6117)
:: (mosheh) Moses (4872)
:, (qodesh) holy (saint) (6944)
(Yah) Yah (Yahweh) (3050)
(khah-ee) congregation (2416)
::.: (ba'alym) great (1167-8)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::.: - :, :: - :,. ::.: - ., ::.:
Phonetic: Baalam Qetseh, baalym Yak'ab, Moshe qodesh yakahy baalym
Meaning: LORD (of a) CUT-OFF (frontier) NATION, [Joseph], NOBLES (of) YAKOB
In this case the reference is made to the "cut-off" nation, or "qetseh." This is clearly a
refernce to the ancient Israelites who were held as slaves in Egypt "shakanputan," and cut-
off from their land and inheritance. The later use of the term "Quitz" in Guatemala, by the
Maya, was obviously because the entire area (Central America), was cut-off from the
Mediterranean (after the Third Punic War). The even later, "Quetzal-coatl" Votn (2nd cen-
tury A.D.), was cut-off from Scandanavia and as such could also claim to be one of the
"Balam Quitz."
Iq'ui balam is claimed to have remained unmarried in the - Titulo de los Seores de
Totanicapn, p. 16 This fact is quite interesting and is appropriate to this work's under-
standing and posit, as Iq'ui balam was not an individual at all. Iq'ui balam could not have
been married, to humans, as were the others, because this name signifies the entire Quich
(or analogous Israelite) nation ( Yah's great congregation ). This fact also helps confirm the
concept of Shemetic transliteration of the Mayan tongue.
(The concept of the nation being married to : ( Yahweh) is not being discussed here).
The following names are from the Quich list of eighteen months. These are specific
names of specific months.
"7. Nabey liquin ca, soft and slippery soil
8. Ucab liquin ca, second month of slippery soil
- Popol Vuh, Recinos, 1977, p.108
.: (na) now (4994)
:: (bo) indeed (935)
: (lakh) moist (3892)
("ground," or soil by implication)
::: (koon) prepare (3559)
: (seh-aw) for grain (5429)
:,. (o-qab) last, end (6118)
: (lakh) moist (3892)
::: (koon) prepare (3559)
: (seh-a) for grain (5429)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : ::: : :: .: : ::: : :,.
Phonetic: Na-bo lakh-koon seh-aw, o-qab lakh-koon seh-ah
Meaning: NOW, INDEED (is) MOIST (the ground) TO PREPARE FOR GRAIN (plow),...
The Hebrew/Shemetic meanings come through clearly even with the lack of syntax.
Also from the same section of the Popol Vuh:
"(9). Nabey pach........first time of hatching
(10). Ucab pach.........second time of hatching" - Ibid. p. 108.
.: (na) now (4994)
:: (bo) indeed (935)
,:c (pooq) issue, drop out, draw out (6329)
(by implication, "Hatching")
:,. (o-qab) last, end (6118)
,:c (pooq) issue, drop out, draw out
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ,:c :: .: ,:c :,.
Phonetic: Na-boa pooq - Oqab pooq
Meaning: NOW INDEED (time) FOR ISSUING (hatching).... LAST (of time) FOR ISSU-
ING (hatching)
Again we render accurate Hebrew/Shemetic meanings from the Mayan.
Refering, in the Popol Vuh, to the large families of the Quich Maya we read:
"The empire grew, they were very numerous" 2
"...and each of the lords had large families." 5
2 "E qui chic e pu tzatz"
5 "Tzatz, tzatz..." - Popol Vuh p. 217 (doubling implies "Many")
(ee) country (339)
., (kay-tseh) frontier (7097)
c: (sephah) to accumulate, (5595)
increase or augment
c (po) here, this (6311)
.. (tsatsa) issue, to produce (6631)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: .. c c: .,
Phonetic: ee qet-seh: se-po tsatsa
Maya sources....translations by Carmack: - Quechean Civilization.
MAM E SAKIULEW = "Mam people of the white land" - Quechean Civilization. p.
also called "Zakuleu," - Ibid p. 329.
: (ma) that, those (3964)
: ('am) people
,. (ytsaak) Isaac (white people)* (3327)
.~. (tsaw-khore) white * (6715)
::: (yaw-lone) lodging (3210)
* It shall be noted that the Israelite tribes (northern kingdom) were called, at various times,
"Sac, Saccae, Saca-suni, "and ultimately Saxons, all based on their original tribal name,
"Issack." Therefore; the Mayan word, "zak -iulew" referring to these white-faced (Shemetic,
Hebrew) people, takes on great significance in this linguistic reconstruction.
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: :: ,. :: .~.
Phonetic: ma-am ytsaak yaw-loo-n tsaw-khore
Meaning: THAT LODGING OF THOSE YSAAK PEOPLE (who are white).
[ As were the Hebrews and the Toltecs ]
Zac, = "white" -Popol Vuh p. 108.
Sac Amak' = "white hamlet," - Ibid 327.
Sacorowach = "quail, from 'white is its face" "Main kin-based political unit."
- Quechean Civilization,p. 307 ftnt 3.
[ this can be none other than a Hebrew/Tolteca, white-skinned, ethnic-racial ruling fam-
ily as differentiated from the subjugated, brown-skinned Maya ]
~: (tsaw-khore) white (6715)
Note: Itzaak. Is the name of the house of Israel. This name ultimately evolved into such
names as Sacae, Saka, Saacae-Tithrakuda, Sacae-Skuthae- Sythians, Saacasuni
(sons of Saac), Sakya in India, and finally Saxons. These people are known to be light
skinned (or "white"), hence the Mayan analogy, "white faced." The Toltec, man-deity who
presided over the "golden age of Anhuac (and the Mayans as well), was Votn/Kukulcn-
"Quetzalcoatl, a bearded, white man, who left, into the Atlantic Ocean, promising to
return." - History of the Conquest of Mexico and Peru, Prescott, p. 295.
Itz, "The Toltecs migrated farther south to dominate the 'new' empire of the Mayas,
whose cultural center was Chichn Itz. Here the Toltecs became known as the Itz." -
The Book of the Hopi. Frank Waters .
The Israelites were always known as the Itzak (Isaac). In Genesis 21:12, Yahweh
states to Abraham, the progenitor of the Israelites, that, "Through Ytsaak (Isaac), shall
your descendants be named."
,. (yits-khawk) Isaac, Laughter, (3327)
sport, mock
The Itz are to be identified directly with Saccae (Isaacae), Israelite, Tolteca tribes which we
are proving here to be one and the same.
"Amak Tan" (Amak'Dan) hamlet of the Tribe of Tan (Dan)
- Quechean Civilization, p. 288.
DAN one of the twelve tribes of Israel. Dan is famous for fraternizing with the
Kanaanites. In a war between Israel and the kings of Kanaan, the soldiers of Dan refused
to fight, and stayed in ships - Judges 5:1.. This was obviously because they did not want
to fight for or against their friends the Kanaanites.
:: (ammah) people, nation. (523-4)
community of persons
: (dan) Dan a tribe of Israel (1835)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :
phonetic: ammach Dan
AL MEH-HEN OB = "Those who have fathers and mothers... meaning those who
could boast a geneaology. - Gods, Graves and Scholars, p. 435.
: (el) mighty one (410)
: (mah) that which (4101)
(hen) they (had) (2004-7)
: (ab) father (parentage) (1)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : : :
Phonetic: el mah-hen ab
Meaning: MIGHTY (personages), THEY, WHICH HAD FATHERS (geneaology)
Note: Geneaologies were important to royalty for the legitimacy of their claim to rule.
Even common Israelites had to know their own geneaology and be able to recite it in land
claims and for other such legal reasons. It, therefore, follows that the noble class
(Hebrew/Tolteca) of the Maya would carry on such a tradition.
Eagle Kight warrior head from the
Meuseum of Anthropology Mexico
City . From this picture it is easy to
see that the Toltecs wre not anything
like the Aztecs or Maya. Their place-
names are Hebrew, and appear to be
descended from the Moundbuilder
people of North America in what
was then called Aztln.
"This noble class included the Halacunicil, or independent, native Mayan rulers of
hereditary princes. The words Halacunicil mean 'the true man,' 'the real thing.' the
priesthood was also part of the ruling class, and its members were recruited from the
nobility." - Popol Vuh also see Codex Perez, The Book of Chilam Balam of Mani p. 66
n.4, p. 110 n. 168.
: (halak) continual (1980)
: (o) also, and (176)
:: (naw-see) king (priest), (5387)
chief ruler
: (el) mighty one (410)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :: : :
Phonetic: Halak ow naci-el
Cham-Cham "Insignia of royalty." - Popol Vuh, Recinos, p. 208.
:: ( shem) position, appellation (8034)
honor, authority,
character, name
: (kham) kHam, (father of the Kanaanites ) (2526)
progenitor of the Phoenicians:
the ancestors of the Maya.
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :: - : :
phonetic: shem- cham or. cham-cham
Meaning: NAME OF AUTHORITY or: (from kHam, usually called Ham)
The Toltecs were the authority in central Mexico from about the second century A.D.
until the time the Aztecs arrived in the 12th century. They lorded it over the Maya who
called them the white-faced Sak, and the Itza. The Tolteca were the ruling clas or
Kingly class, who demanded that the Maya build the white stone structures whcih included
the pyramids, but when they were finally defeated by the Maya, the Maya reverted to the
more indolent life style that they had previously been accoustomed to. The Maya were
never purveyors of high civilization as moderns falsely conclude. The Maya records,
codexes and Titulos, testify to these facts. Latter-day Mayanologists, instead try to make
the Maya into the glorious civilization, they themselves want it to have been. But to do this
they must deny the veracity of the internal data in the Titulos.
Mayan Account:
Tecum: Mayan king during conquest 12
12 Tecum, 'heaped up. - Popol Vuh, Recinos, p.232.
::,: (tek-oo-ma') power to stand (from 6965) (8617)
::, (koom) prime root, to rise, get up (6965)
lift up, raise up, set up
stand up
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: TECUM
Hebrew: ::,:
Phonetic: tequma
Meaning: TO HEAP UP
Mayan Account:
"CAN."....... serpent - Popol Vuh, Recinos, p.107.
:: (tan) serpent (8565)
K and T are phoenetically similar in many languages.
Note: in DDA p. 113 on ( Polynesian K = Tahitian T ). Analysis in Michener's
"Hawaii:" (ie Te ala i Tahiti in Tahitian equals Ke ala i Kahiki in Hawaiian, mean-
ing the way to Tahiti ). English speakers have no inlkling of such linguistic twists
and turns, so it is understandable why many specialists, working in these fields, have
not recognized these similarities when confronted by them, not-to-mention an almost
universal lack of ancient tongues among American archaeologists, at least in the recent
"PAN."... "Both names have the locative pan 'in' or, 'at.'"
- Quechean Civilization, Carmack, p. 315.
:: (ban) in (1121)
"ACHI".......derived from achi, "male," or "Man"
- Quechean Civilization, Carmack, p. 307.
: (eesh-(y) man, (ayshee = my man) (376)
husband, male, (men)
Mayan: ACHI
Hebrew: :
Meaning: MALE ENTITY, or. MY MAN
"JEC" ..."Reference to a tree in Utatln where transgressors of the law were hanged or
otherwise punished,"
- The Quich Mayas of Utatln, Carmack p. 198.
: (yaw-kakh) convict, chasten (3198)
Note: "J" did not exist anciently in any language, but evolved from Y in the seventeenth
century. Therefore " JEC" is equally "YEC."
"AKAJ"..."Near the place of disgrace the Quichs maintained a collection of beehives
(Akaj). Transgressors were sent there naked to pay their debts."
-The Quich Mayas of Utatln, p. 198.
::. (aw-kas') tie, with fetters, stocks (5913-14)
Here we see a translocation of meaning. It was not the hives that were being referred to,
rather, the stocks where the transgressor was confined. This is caused by a slight misinter-
pretation, as is the case with the Molay birds which actually meant flock.
"Nonoualco..."the land of the dumb." - Popol Vuh. p. 65.
: (no) now (4994)
:.: (na'al) shut up (5274)
: (koh) here (3541)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::.::
Phonetic: no na'al koh
Meaning: NOW SHUT UP (dumb) HERE
Mayan Account:
"NAHUALES" "The wise men, the Nahuales, the chiefs and LEADERS of
the three great peoples and the others who joined them...came from the other part of the
ocean, from where the sun rises, a place called Pa Tuln, Pa, Civan (cHiwim)."
- Titulo de Los Seores de Totonicapn, p. 169.
:: (nahal) conduct, lead, sustain (5095)
carry, feed, guide
Mayan: NAHUAL (-ES) (Spanish ending)
Hebrew: ::
Phonetic: nahal
Additional Mayan words and phrases from the Popol Vuh
translated by Ralph Nelson, Houghton Mifflin, Boston 1976
"Ch'ab (muddy Ground)" Popol Vuh - Nelson, Introduction p. 11
:: (sha'ab ) to bale up water (7579)
Mayan: CH' AB
Hebrew: ::
Phonetic: sha-aab
"Tizil lakam (sprouts show)" - Ibid, introduction p. 11
::: (zalzal) twig (sprout) (2150)
::: (zool) root (2107)
::: (lakym) unto you (grammatical)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::: :::
Phonetic: zalal Lakym
Meaning: SHOW TWIG (sprout) UNTO YOU
"..but Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes to keep them human. Heart of Heaven,
who is perhaps ultimate wisdom, was known multiply as Caculha Huracn (leg of light-
ning), chipi-Caculcha (small flash) Raxa-Caculcha (green flash)
-Popol Vuh, Nelson introduction p. 16.
: (kah) he (3541)
::, (kole) lightning, spark, thunder (6963)
: (kah) thus (3541)
:~. ('areshah) canopy, arch (6210)
c. (tsiph-ee) small (6730)
Hebrew: :::,: :~. c.
Phonetic: Kah-qol kha , areshah, tsypee
Meaning: HE OF THE LIGHTNING (a storm god),
Mayan: "Huracn" Caculha Huracn (leg of lightning)
~: (urah) Illumination, light, bright, fire ( 219)
~ (hara) Mountainous (2024)
: (kahn) priest (3547)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : ~:
"Huracn" needs no further introduction as the source for, or a derivitive of the Mayan
and English word "hurricane - Huracn," or, the Shemetic Huru- khan (Priest of the
Huru), obviously from a type of "priest" that either claimed to have control over the
weather as represented by the brilliant mountain lightning, or even appeared so, from the
idea that Moses face, after conferring with Yahweh on mount kHoreb-Sinai, glowed as he
came down the mountain which, in turn, rumbled and burned and was covered with
clouds. It was a fearsome sight to see, and one which could have engendered the idea of a
storm, lightning and fire priest. Speculative but interesting and even possible in the light
of our present context.
A 1598 Engraving from the Brevssima Relacin by Bartolom de las Casas
When the cacique was bound to the post, a Franciscan friar...told him some of the matters
of our Faith, which the chieftan had never heard before... The friar told the cacique that if
he desired to believe these things, he would go to heaven...but if not he would go to Hell
and suffer eternal torment and sorrow. The cacique...asked the friar if Christians went to
heaven, and was told that the good ones did. The cacique, without further thought, said
that he did not wish to go to heaven but to Hell, so as not to be with the Spaniards or to
see such cruel people.
The Linguistics
of the
Conquest of Mexico
In the sixteenth century the Castillian Spanish, conquistadores brought along with them,
from the most Catholic cadres of Romeish Spain, Jesuit priests, who were to convert the
heathen Meso-American Indians. Their mission was to save their poor souls from hell,
while their brother Spaniards picked their pockets. Actually, the Spanish effort under
Hernando Corts, decapitated the Indian empire and stole not simply the wealth of the
empires, or the land itself, but the soul and mind of the indigenous people from Mexico to
Peru and parts southward.
These highly motivated individuals, in an effort to explain the embarrassingly clear, pres-
ence of human beings where no human beings belonged, according to the Roman Catholic
doctrine of the day, began to delve into and research the origins and history of the Meso-
Americans. It is recorded again and again that many people of that time believed the
natives to be displaced Carthaginians or Lost Israelites. The former, was true to a degree,
actually they were descendants of many of the Kanaanite tribes of the Mediterranean area,
which was long ago vacated by their Kanaanite fathers. The Carthaginians were Tyrians
and Sidonii according to the Romans* (see, Discovery of Ancient America p. 88 ftnt.)
The fact is, that the Maya were descendants of a specific Kanaanite tribe, the kHwym
(Hivites). Aside from the linguistics already demonstrated, this is evidenced by the unique
familial, facial characteristics of the Maya. Adding to this, the Maya possess the general
physical type of the Kanaanite, including dark skin hue, except they are of a slightly short-
er stature, which also helps identify them as a familial type within a type. For a photo-
graphic demonstration of that type see, Discovery of Ancient America, p. 89. This book,
p. 54 ).
*Silius Italicus pp. 3, 26, 112
Most importantly, however, this name kHiwym is their own name for their own tribe,
not some anthropologists contrivance. It is the prima facie linguistic evidence for proper
and precise identification.
The last and greatest migration of Kanaanites (now Carthaginians) to the Americas
(Aztln/Quich), occurred at the end of the third Punic war, with the fall of Carthage in
146 B.C. This was the major push, although the Americas (Aztln/Quich) were populated
for nearly a thousand years before that by these same Kanaanite families, better known as
the Phoenician /Carthaginians. The Amerindians and the Kanaanites were one and the
same people. Their facial type is identical. They were both red-skinned. They practiced the
same culture. They both built high places (temples) for worship and infanticide. They both
worshipped the sun (baal). There are literally thousands of cultural similarities between
the two. And now, with this present work, we see they shared the same language.
The spanish priests taught the Maya, among others, the characters and phonetic sounds of
the Spanish alphabet, which slightly differs from our own. The Indians then wrote down,
by transliteration the histories of their fathers in this new alphabet. Neither group were lin-
guists. The modern rules of linguistics were not followed by either side, so the phonetically
written documents are not precise, from a modern linguistic sense.
To illustrate the difficulties created by this situation, visualize a barely literate Mexican
immigrant attempting to translate his Spanish tongue, or English words into written form,
and you will see what ensues. Phonetically his words will work if you sound them out,
This is also illustrated by comparing Spanish and English phonetics. A Spanish word like,
Guanajuato in English phonetics is ( wonn-ah whot-toe ) not: ( Go-oana jew-ay toe ).
Conversely, a difficult word in English for a Mexican, might be sideways which he
would, most assuredly pronounce, (eesaidee ooaiz), his local linguist would instruct him to
say ('said weiz), which would be much closer to the true pronunciation, but not exact.
Another example: the ubiquitous Taller Mechanico, found all over Mexico, which Norte
Americanos usually pronounce (in English), as taller mechanic-oh that is, a mechanic
with a mispronounced -oh as a suffix, of high physical stature. The word taller sim-
ply means work-shop, and is pronounced ( tah-yere ).
In the above cases we share an alphabet, if not a language. Now, try to write Chinese
sounds in Roman characters, using English phonetics. Then compare this work to an
archaic Spanish work of the same words. By this comparison, one should be able to under-
stand the magnitude of the problem.
The problem is actually worse, however, because, in order to draw a true comparison, we
should have a Russian transliterate the Chinese words into the cryllic alphabet; then try to
formulate these Chinese sounds, in English while looking at Chinese and Russian diction-
It helps to have a working knowledge of Hebrew and Spanish. It is essential to under-
stand that certain letters such as; r & l , b & v, and others, are near-phonetic equivalents
and interchangable. One, then is able to comprehend that the creolized Shemetic spoken by
the ancient Maya, which has undergone thousands of years of change and development, is
final proof that there is a direct link between the ancient Mediterranean and the New
The implications of this information are far reaching indeed. People who previously
thought that the native Americans were not at all from the same wellspring of humanity in
the middle east, that thought that they had either evolved here in North America or trun-
dled over the hypothetical Asian Land Bridge in the deep dark past, will have to do some
rethinking. How will they deal with the awesome story of the sea opening a path for the
Israelite tribes, now that it is known that the Mayan indians, here in the Americas, were
well aware of this famous event? Disbelief? Most likely. Don't confuse us with facts, our
minds are made up!
How can critics of the validity of the story, say that the Catholic priests inculcated the
Mayans with the biblical histories, so they could seem to be misplaced Israelites, who did-
nt look a bit like the Maya? (see Discovery of Ancient America, pp. 89-91) How could
they become, genetically, something that they were not? Since it has been demonstrated by
this work, that the very idiom of the Maya was Shemetic something that the Catholics
were unable to have caused by supposed religious inculcation; how indeed?
In recent years, the archaeological and anthropological establishment has argued that dif-
fusionists, that is, those who believe that technology came to the ancient American shores
in the minds of old world men, are trying to make the Amerindian look indolent, and stu-
The problem of the white god syndrome lording it over the subjugated, dark-skinned
natives, has been blown out of proporton to reality. The Maya were, indeed dominated by
the white, Tolteca overlords. This in itself did not make them inferior. They admitted that it
had transpired. Like it or not, it remains a fact of their own histories.
It is foolish of establishment archaeologists and anthropoligists to want the native
Americans to have independently, and without the aid of the Mediterranean civilization,
invented a universe of technology, identical to that of the old world. This concept is prepos-
terous, but is posited by the establishment, anti-diffusionists in an attempt to gain sympa-
thy by appealing to the false pride of native Americans, and to cause a diversionary emo-
tional argument to arise, in hopes of masking the true evidence in a whirl of smoke.
How can any thinking individual, interested in the fame and heritage of the indigenous
people of the Americas fail to see that it was their very high technological development in
naval expertise that got them here in the first place?
The Battle of
...about the date on which the battle of Quetzaltenango took place, previous to the
conquest of the Quich by Alvarado, the Dominican chronicler says that this battle was
fought in March, and that this date agrees with what Diego Reynoso says in his written
accounts of those times (he was an indian whom Bishop Marroqun took from the vil-
lage of Utatln and taught to read and write), that the conquest of the Quich by Don
Pedro de Alvarado took place at the beginning of April about Holy Week of this year of
twenty-four, ( 1524 ) by the following Quich words:
Chupam ic abril caztahibal pascua xulic Donadiu ahlabal varal pa
queche ta xporox tinamit, ta xcach ahauarem, ta xtane patan rumal
ronohel amac xpatanih chiquivach ca mam ca cahau pa queche.
Which mean: During Lent, Donadiu, captain of the war, came here in the Quich
[country] and then the village, or town, was burned, and the Kingdom was ended and
the tribes stopped paying tribute, the tribute which they had given to our fathers and
grandfathers. - Popol Vuh, Recinos, p. 25
:: (shooah) destruction, devastation (7721)
:c (poh) here, this place (6311)
:. (am) nation, people (5971)
(ak) surely (389)
abril ( Spanish word, April, but equivalent to Hebrew month of Abib )
::: (kazeh) prophets : (2374)
: (tah) tell (8376)
:: (habal) vanity, lead astray (i.e. lies) (1891)
pascua ( Spanish word for Passover, later to mean Holy Week
:: (shelakh) weapon (i.e. warrior) (7973)
Don-adio ( Spanish words meaning Lord of god)
:. (ahlah) over (5924)
::: (bel, baal) lord : (1078)
: (wu) and ( Hebrew part of speech - waw consequtive )
:~.: (aw-ral) (to) strip (6188)
:c (poh) this place, here (6311)
:., (Qitseh) Quich : (7097)
: (ta) (I) tell (8376)
~c: (shapiyr) beautifully (8208)
:. (ash) dressed (6213)
::: (tanim) serpents (8577)
: :: (mita) arrived : (4291)
: (ta) (I) tell (8376)
,: (shq) making sport, mocking: (7832)
: (ahh) oh! pain : (162)
~: (aure) (he) set on fire (215)
: :. (am) (the) nation (5971)
: (tah) (I) tell (8376)
::: (shitnaw) (he) attacked (7853)
:c (poh) this place: (6311)
:: (tan) monster : (8565)
::~ (room) levy, tax, (tribute) (7311)
:. (all) yoke, burden (5923)
::~ (rinnah) proclamation (7440)
: (el) great (410)
,:. (amaq) profound (6009)
:c: (shapat) punishment (8199)
:: (tanah) to attribute honor (8576)
.,: (shaqaw) cease, abate (8257)
:,:. (ook) (to) be pressed :[demanded] (5781)
: (kah) hitherto (3542)
: (mah) great (4101)
:. (am) nation, people (5971)
: (kah) in that manner (3542)
:: (kawah) (was) burned (3554)
:c (poh) this place (6311)
., (qitseh) Quich : (7097)
Comparison: Transliteration:
Chupam ic abril caztahibal pascua xulic Donadiu ahlabal varal pa
queche ta xporox tinamit, ta xcach ahauarem, ta xtane patan rumal
ronohel amac xpatanih chiquivach ca mam ca cahau pa queche.
:: :. donadio :: pascua :: : :: abril :. :c :: (read right to left)
:. ~: ,: : :: :: :. ~c: : ., :c :~.:
: ,:. .,: :: :c: ,:. : ::~ :. ::~ : :c ::: :
., :c :: : :. :
( Underlined and colored are Mayan conjunctions, atypical to biblical Hebrew )
Actual / literal Shemetic Translation:
( Colored words are Spanish words in the Mayan text .)
To repeat the Translation from the Popol Vuh - Recinos, p. 25:
During Lent, [april] Don-adiu, captain of war, came here in the Quich
[country] and then the village, or town, was burned, and the Kingdomwas ended and
the tribes stopped paying tribute, the tribute which they had given to our fathers and
By comparing the frequency of the word Quich, used near the beginning of the text
and precisely at the last word, we are able to discern that the translation of the Popol Vuh
by Adrin Recinos into Spanish (and the subsequent one into English by Delia Goetz and
Silvanus Griswold Morley) is not a literal one and is lacking a precise, word-for-word
meaning. It is a paraphrase translation into Spanish, then paraphrased into English. Since
the meanings of the two, the translation by Recinos and the transliteration by this reseach-
er, are as precisely equivalent as they certainly appear to be, there can be no further lin-
guistic grounds to deny that the two languages have a common ancestor.
This famous story of the Conquistador Don Pedro Alvarado is told by the Mayan writer
in beautiful, expressive terms. The destruction that the Spaniards wrought on the Maya
capital of Quetzaltenango in April of 1524 A.D. was devastating and total. As with the
Aztecs before, the Spaniards effectively decapitated the native government and civilization.
The translation of this story made by Adrin Recinos is very good, but not precise. It was
good enough, however, to get the drift of the message, and for the ultimate purpose of
comparison with Hebrew, which enables us to see the true language, in its ancient form,
emerge. If the language of the Maya has indeed, now been demonstrated to be Shemetic
and their very tribe identified as the west Shemetic speaking, cHametic people, known
anciently as the Hivites of Palestine, we have come full circle, and the true origins of one of
the ocean- crossing peoples has been proven. Your establishment is wrong Dr. Campbell.
We now, need to toss overboard, all the excess baggage brought along by the academic
establishment, the antiquarians: Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Mayan linguists, and
Historians. This lot has forbidden such knowledge in the past, and we have no hope of
them changing their stance. They will continue to blindly fight against the light, but there
will be those who continue on, in the pursuit of truth and illumination.
This piece of work will stand as the prima facie evidence against the establishment.
Their reticence to review and attempt to understand this work will only demonstrate their
arrogance and ignorance.
It is aknowledged that this researcher is not a classically trained linguist nor a Semiticist
(Shemeticist), but it is from this position outside the formal academy, that one is able to
see clearly; in the absence of academic bias and peer pressure. It is also the result of some
inspiration. If one were trained in the establishment academy NOT to be able to recognize
the Shemetic, linguistic connection or Nexus, here in the Americas, and to have a built-in
prejudice against such ideas, it seems almost possible to excuse that professional on the
basis of ignorance.
If the argument presented in this work is denied a hearing, however, by that "expert" as
a result of his bias, the loss to that closed mind would be great indeed. Academics such as
Dennis Teadlock, Lyle Campbell and Marshall Mckusik have denied such a possibility is
even remotely feasable. As the evidence grows against their dearly held theories of the
origins of the early American native populations, they will retreat to even deeper depths of
ignorance to a position where, finally, no light will even be able to reach them.
I am happy to report that certain academics of high order and repute have seen this
work and understand its importance. One such individual is Dr. Cyrus H, Gordon,
(Professor Emeritus, Brandeis University, Boston and late of Harvard) whose reputation
needs no further inhancement here. Dr. Gordon has written to me on the subject.
Cyrus H. Gordon
August 19,1992
Dear Dave Deal:
I am favorably disposed to the thesis in THE NEXUS because
from the contents of the Popol Vuh I concluded, nearly twenty-five
years ago, that a common Near East source underlies it and the
early chapters of Genesis. I had, however, no inkling of the linguis-
tic common demoninator that you are pointing out.
I strongly suggest that you read the chapter on the POPOL
VUH in my BEFORE COLUMBUS. That book is out of print, but it is
probably available in several of your local libraries. It had a wide
sale when it appeared about twenty years ago in its first printing
and again in the revised second printing. It was not kept in print
(by Crown Publishers) probably because of hostile reviews from
an outraged Establishment.
Your book is not easy for me to read because you are an
independent thinker outside the Mayan, Hebrew and linguistic
establishments. But I'll struggle through it because it is very
important for the problem on which I am now working: global
With thanks and best wishes for your continued success
Sincerely yours Cyrus H. Gordon
More Mayan:
Cuautenco.This pueblo was occupied by Totonac so-called because they came from
where the sun rises over 763 years ago [ that is prior to 1581= 818 A.D.]. Then came
four individuals who conquered the Totonac...The original Totonac were four. They
emerged from the sea and, as their numbers increased, they founded 13 settlements
within a range of 6 leagues. This Totonac population enjoyed 400 years of peaceful exis-
tence before it was conquered by the Chichimecs. The latter occupied a dominant posi-
tion for 109 years, until the arrival of the ambassadors of Moctezuma, to whom they
gave tribute and obedience. Mexican supremacy endured until terminated by the
Spanish Conquest - Paso y Troncoso 5: 108)....A summary of Torquemadas account fol-
lows: The Totonac emerged from the famous site of Chicomoztoc, or Seven Caves, in
company with Xalpaneca, leaving the Chichimecs within the cavern. They proceeded to
Teotihuacan, where they remained sufficiently long to construct the Pyramids of the Sun
and the Moon; they then continued to Atenamitic, said to be at the site of historic
Zacatln...During the term of the second chief, the Chichimecs appeared as a threating
cloud in the west and established themselves at Nepoalco, 6 leagues from
Mizquilhuacan. They were poor, naked and ate raw meat... - Tajin Totonac, Kelly,
Isabel, and Palerm, Angel. Smithsonian Institute of Social Anthropology, Publication No. 13
United States Government Printing Office, 1952 pp. 17-18
Totonac Tribe founded by four individuals who migrated from across the sea, from the
direction of the rising sun. - IBID p.17.
: (toh) designate, point out (8376)
::: (ten-ook) pinnacle, tip, extremity (8571)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: TO -TONAC
Hebrew: ::: :
Meaning: DESIGNATION (of) PINNACLE (the top) lit.
We are the highest
Note: under the great pyramid of the sun at Teotihuacan, a small cave consisting of seven chambers was recent-
ly excavated. It was thought by the archaeologist in charge that he had indeed discovered the land across the
sea, the fabled land of Chivan Tuln the land of seven caves. This was not the fabled land across the sea at all,
but it may have been a memorial to that land, preserved under the great pyramid by its Toltec builders.
Cuautenco Totonac, named this because they came from where the sun rises -Ibid p. 17
:, (qua) region of Babylon (6970)
:: (aootah) progeny (226)
::: (ten-ook) pinnacle, extended, extremity (8571)
: (koe) here (3541)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : ::: :: :,
Mayan: Chicomoztoc: Place name on other side of the sea, Seven caves - Ibid p. 17
::: (shekem) ridge, spur of hill (7927)
:.:: (maoz) den, dwelling, habitation (4589): see (4583)
: (took) cutting, depression (8496): see (8431)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :.:: :::
Meaning: DEN, CUT (into) HILL, RIDGE
Mayan: Nepoalco, Place where the Chichimecs were poor, naked and ate raw meat. -
- Ibid p. 18.
:c: (naw-pal) fallen, cast down, inferior : (7927) also see: (5034)
: (koe) here, now (3541)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :c:
Chichimeca, The Chichimecs, now numerous, took possession of Totonac territory and
from that time treated the Totonac as their vassals and subjects - bid, p. 18.
:: (sheshe) plunder, rob, spoil (8154)
: (maw-khaw) destroy, ambush, blot out (4229)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: CHICHI -MEC-A ( native pronounciation )
Hebrew: : ::
And so the girl returned home, and after six months had passed, her father, who was
called Cuchumaquic, noticed her condition. At once the Maidens secret was discovered by
her father when he observed that she was pregnant.(4)
(4) Ta x-il ri ral, literally, when he saw the son. - Popol Vuh p.120.
~:: (teshuwrah) arrival, a gift (8670)
~ (rah) saw, see (7200)
:~ (ruw) aspect, form (7299)
:~ ('ool) with young (5763)
child (son) (5764)
Comparison / Transliteration: (Note: r =l , l =r )
Mayan: TA X -IL RI RU AL
Hebrew: ::. :~ ~ ~::
My daughter is pregnant, (5) Sirs, she has been disgraced. (6)
(5) Qo chi ral, literally, she is with child. -
(6) Xa u hoxbal, literally, is nothing more than a prostitute. - Popol Vuh p. 120.
:: (kowsh) grown fat (3780)
~. (ahyeer) bearing a burden (5895)
::. ('ool) with young (5763)
child (son) (5764)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: QO CHI R AL
Hebrew: ::. ~. ::
(6) Xa u hoxbal is nothing more than a prostitute - Ibid p 120.
:: (shooah) like (as though) (7739)
: (hoo) she (1931)
~:: (shabar ) buys, sells ( deals ) (7666)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Mayan: XA U HO -XBAR ( XBAL )
Hebrew: ~:: : :: ( r and l are interchangable in Shemetic )
Meaning: LIKE SHE WHO SELLS (her body)
Mayan: Apa ahchoc e ri aal qo ch a pam, at nu meal?...Whose are the children
that you carry, my daughter. (8) Apa ahchoc e ri a(u)'al qo ch a pam, at nu
meal? (8)....take her and sacrifice her... - Popol Vuh,Recinos, p. 121.
:c ('aphow) then (645)
('ach) anothers (251)
: (huwk) bring (carry) (1946)
~ (yeiryah) hanging (3407)
::. ('ool) child (son) (5764)
:: (kashah) grown fat (3780)
: (ban) daughter (1121)
: (ath) thou (859)
::: (muwm) blemish, stain (3971)
::: (muwl) destroy, cut down, in pieces (4135)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ::: ::: : : :: ::. ~ : :c
Meaning: THEN, (youve) GROWN FAT, (you) BRING HANGING (as in womb) ANOTH-
Mayan: "When this conversation... was over, Corts ordered blue and green glass beads
to be given to the two youths, who were caciques of high rank" - Discovery and
Conquest of Mexico, Bernal Diaz del Castillo. p. 96.
"Cacique" Amerindian word for chieftan.
,: (Chazaq-ee) strong, courageous (2388)
conquerers, mighty, play the man
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: ,:
"Cossak" seems to be derived from this ancient Shemetic word.
"Xibalba," the underworld place of the "gods" - Popol Vuh.
: (ayshee) mighty persons (376)
:: (ba'al) Canaanite god (1078)
: (bah) entrance (872)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hebrew: : :: :
Meaning: ENTRANCE TO (Place of ) MIGHTY GOD
The natural giant caves of Palestine which had housed the Hivite/Mayans in the days
when they had lived in that land (cHiwim Tuln), may be looked upon as underground
places where their "gods," which in this case means, forefathers mythically continued to
dwell. It is not so strange that the descendants would view such places as the underground
abodes of the gods, particularly when the Canaanite sun-god Ba'al was believed to have
entered the ground each and every night, only to come out again in the morning --
Mayan: "GUMARCAAH: Gumarcaah means rotten huts. - Popol Vuh, p. 215.
~:. (gamar) come to an end, fallen, failure (1584)
:~: (markah) pile, array, row, arrangement (4634)
Hebrew: :~: ~:. ( Hebrew conjunction ) gmar -markah ( Hebrew conjunction )
CUES, very large temples for ceremonial gatherings. - Quichean Civilization
,: (queh) gather together (6960)
English still uses this word for gathering in lines qeue.
Mayan: CAPUT ZIHIL, meaning born again, or act of regeneration.
- The Rattlesnake School, Jose Bolio, Yucatan, Mexico, p. 49.
c, (qaputs) die, finished (7092)
:. (tsihil) lift up, rejoice, shout, be cheerful (6670)
Hebrew: :. c,
NOTE: this term born again is used in the Bible (i.e. John 3 to designate resurrection of the dead. It is
misused to mean born again in some sort of spiritual way, but the Bible clearly uses it in the regenerated
from physical death sense (I Corinthians 15 ff).
Mayan: Ch'ubic'abal, ...The condemned are whipped
- The Quich Mayas of Utitln, Carmack p.198)
:: (shabah) captives (7617)
(awk) surely (389)
:: (khebel) noose, ruin, hurt, destruction, (2254-5-6)
sorrow, damage writhe in pain
Hebrew: :: ::
Meaning: CAPTIVES SURELY HURT, (Writhe in pain)
Mayan: Alabitz...Those of bad birth - ibid p. 151.
: el) mighty one, diety (410)
:: leb) mind, wisdom, understanding (3820)
.: (batsah) cut off, wounded (1214)
Hebrew: .: :: :
Meaning: one whose MIND (WISDOM) is CUT OFF (or wounded at birth) by the
Malcriados, in Spanish, carries a similar meaning. Those who have been created, or
raised bad (not badly). In English we might say ,Born bad. In essence, one whose birth
marked the beginning of a life of crime or violence, lacking the virtue of wisdom, was an
ill-begotten; Alabitz.
Names and place names according to the Mayan records:
Mayan Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Kaminaljuyu city built in the : :: : : hot springs (2540)
volcanic highlands ( khamunal shuaeeoo ) ...near (413)
( Aztecs p. 13 ) ...rising (7721) (339)
... hence (176)
Mayan Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Nabe talk or speak .:: (or) :: utter, gush forth (5042)
- Quechean Civilization, p. 307 ( nabaw ) speak
prophecy, speak, sing (5012-13)
Mayan Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Pan: locative "in or at" :: son: idomatically in (1121)
(ibid p.315) ( ben )
The former staggered about, colliding with the few remaining dancers, maudlinly
grasping their friends around the neck and swearing eternal friendship, or in a spirit
of bravado shouting, Unicen Xiben! Soy Hombre! I am a Man! to impress the world
in three languages of their virile qualities.
- Maya Archaeologist J. Eric. S. Thompson, page 135
Mayan Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Unicen Xiben: I am a man : : : : : Oh! (188)
( ooe ene ashen ayshee ben ) ...proud (3238)
X = Sh ...dust (6227)'s (376)
This phrase has two Hebrew conjunctions: ...son (1123)
Phonetic: ui- ni- cen ashee ben
The western section of the river was called Joronalaja (cold water), while the eastern
section was Mikknaja (hot water),
from, The Quich Mayas of Utatln, Carmack, page 73.
Mayan Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Joronalaja: cold water : :. . ~ mountain (2022)
( hor ayn alah-aza ) ...spring (5869)
(hor-on aal aza) ...take away (5927), heat (228)
Mik inaja: hot water : . ,: melting (4716)
( miq ayn aza ) ...spring (5869)
... hot , heat (228)
This roundabout way of speaking, or circumlocution, is typical of creolized speech patterns,
and since we are demonstrating that very point, it makes for good creole logic.
Chay Abah: ...mentioned in the Memorial de Solol, as the symbol of the divinity, which
the Cakchiquel have worshipped from ancient times. - Popol Vuh Recinos, page 205
Maya Meaning Hebrew Meaning #
Chay Abah: symbol of divinity : life (2417)
(chay abah) breath (14)
Mayan: Chay Abah
Hebrew: :
Meaning: LIFE'S BREATH or BREATH OF LIFE ( : ::: breath of life )
And Yahweh elohym formed man out of the dust from the ground and blew into his
nostrils the breath of life and man became a living being. - Genesis 2:7
The Cakchiquel have been already identified as those who passed through the sea, the
waters having parted as they passed, therefore Israel.
Israel did, in fact, consider that Yahweh was the breath of life, based on the scriptural
account of the creation and other prophecies such as - Ezekiel 37.
BUTIC Bishop Las Casas says in his work They had, among them, information of
the flood and the end of the world, and called it Butic, which is the word which means
flood of many waters and means [the final] judgement, and so they believe that another
Butic is about to come, which is another flood and judgement, not of water, but of fire,
which they say would end the world. - Popol Vuh, Recinos p. 92
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
,:: (betiq) cut, pierce, thrust through (1333)
:: (batah) desolation desolate, waste (1326-7)
(ak) surely (389)
Mayan: BUTIC
Hebrew: :: or: ,::
One needs little imagination to see a comparison between the Mayan eschatology and
that of the Bible. - see Isaiah 24:1ff, Malachi 3:16 - 4:5, and Revelation 20: 10-15
Camalcn: And immediately they received the fire. Then they became warm. There was
nevertheless, a tribe who stole the fire in the smoke... the god of Cakchiquel was called
Chamalcn - Popol Vuh p. 180.
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
: (kham) hot, burning ( major ancestor ) (2525)
: (al) mighty one (ie god ) (410)
: (kahan) officiate, priest (3547)
Elsewhere it has been demonstrated that the Maya, a kHametic/Kanaanite family from
Palestine known as the kHywym (Hivites) had assimilated the history and tradition of the
Israelites. While this is true, it is also true that they kept their own tradition and history,
blending it one with the other. Here is a case of this blending. The Cakchiquels were not
kHametic, but Shemetic, so their ancestor was not kHam. The Maya held him as an ances-
tor and apparently, deified him.
Other people have deified this ancestor, son of Noah. As an example; the Japanese hold
Kamei, who is also an ancestor, as divine. In this case kHamei has become female over the
course of millenia, only because they could not very well have the sun god as the male
divinity and have kHamei other than female. Male gods are supposed to have consorts,
at least according to the ancient trinity religions; for example: Marduk/Ishtar/ Nin
Bal/Belti / Tamuz Horus/ Isis/ Osirus Theos/DeMete/Cupid and finally the Roman:
God/Mary / Jesus. Cam-bhodi is another example. kHam-bhodi (Cambodia) most assuredly
are kHametic people and a bhodi merely means a Buddhist..
TEPETL PUL: Tepetl Pul in the Mexican language means hill of stones
-Popol Vuh p.230.
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
:c: (tophet) altar of stones for cremation, (8613)
holoucaust offerings
: (el) deity, mighty one (410)
:: (bel) Kanaanite deity (Ba'al) (1079)
Hebrew: :: : :c:
Shemetic meaning: hill of stones to burn infants to Ba'al - god.
Legends of
It is the contention of this work that Quetzalcoatl was the third century, Norse king
Votan. Not simply for the reason that Quetzalcoatl's name was Votn, which should give
some cause for comparison, but for the many reasons previously stated. It should also be
explained that the Norse had their origins in the tribes of Israel, therefore many of the
Hebrew cognates that have come down to us from the Phoenician/Maya were probably used
by Votan as well. But it must be remembered that the stories are Mayan and Aztec, which
two languages are our main concern here.
Here the exile (Quetzalcoatl) rested and he asked his servants for a mirror, and looked
at his own face. What thoughts were soever working in his heart, he only said, I am
already old. Then he named that place Vevequauhtitln.
- Bancrofts Works, Native Races vol. III p. 253 The Sun Calls Quetzalcoatl
:: (vo) striken in age (935)
:: :: (vo-vo) doubling is emphatic (very old)
:, (quah) expect (6960)
: (hoo) alas! (1930)
:: (tit) calamity, swept away as dirt (2916)
:: (tala) uncertain, hang in doubt (8511)
: (ana) lament, happen, I as for me (576)
(b and v were both represented by the same letter in biblical Hebrew)
Hebrew: : :: :: : :, :: ::
UNCERTAIN (as to) ITS HAPPENING (ie, timing)
He sat down on a stone to rest. And looking toward Tula, he wept bitterly. His tears
marked and ate into the stone on which he sat, and the print of his hands, and of his back
parts was also found therein when he resumed his journey. He called that place
Temacpalco - Bancrofts Works, Native Races, vol. III p. 253.
:: (taw-mah) consternation, (8539)
dismay, fear
(awk) surely (389)
:.c (paal) ordained (6466)
: (koh) here (3541)
Hebrew: : :.c ::
Tepanoaya "After that he reached a very great and wide river, and he commanded a
stone bridge to be thrown across it; on that bridge he crossed the river, and he named
the place Tepanoaya" - Ibid, Bancroft p.253.
c: (tapach) corbel (as corbelled arch), span (2946-7)
: (noah ) pleasant place (4998)
(ayah) where (346)
Phonetic: TAPACH -NOA -AYA
Hebrew: : c:
Mayan arch is known as the corbelled arch. Not a true arch it is made by overlapping
stones till they meet in the middle, then capped at the top. It is possible to build a bridge in
this manner.
Cohcaapa So the sorcerers said, Go, then, but leave behind all the mechanical arts, the
melting of silver, the working of precious stones and of masonry, the painting, feather
working, and other crafts. And all of these sorcerers despoiled Quetzalcoatl. As for him,
he cast into a fountain all the rich jewels that he had with him; and that fountain was
called Cohcaapa, and so it is named to this day - Ibid Bancroft p. 253
: (kahah) despond, grow dull, utterly (3543)
: (ko) in this manner (3541)
c (ap ) face, ire, forebearing. (639)
suffer, anger, countenance
Phonetics: COHAH -KO -APA
Hebrew: c : :
Cochtoca Drinking, he made himself drunk; he slept upon the road; he bagan to
snore; and when he awoke, he looked on one side and on the other, and tore his hair
with his hands. And the palce was called Cochtoca - Ibid Bancroft p. 254.
, (choq) enactment, ordinance (2706)
,: (tok) sever, cut off (8496-32)
.,: (teqah) strike, smite (8628)
Phonetic: CHOQ-TOQA
Hebrew: .,: ,
Meaning: (The) ENACTMENT (ordinance) OF CUTTING OFF
What has been presented here in The NEXUS, is a completely new look at the Maya
and their origins. What has been posited has been amply proven by means of linguistics.
There is no other way the Maya could have arrived here, in meso-America, except via
trans-oceanic voyage, with a Semitic ( Shemitic ) tongue in their mouths. All other very
compelling evidence, such as well developed calendric system, pyramids, infanticide, pot-
tery, and similar Kanaanite religion aside, this one, singular point, which will never go
away, nor can be ever swept under Major Powells wonderful rug of deception, will prevail,
particularly now, that information is feely exchanged on the world wide web.
Having presented this work, the obvious, needs to be stated. The modern linguists
narrow view of the Meso-American languages and their origins, as being somehow only
local to this area, as is presently held, is in gross error. We have demonstrated that, with-
out equivocation sure. What will be their response to this information? Silence?
More work needs to be accomplished, to be sure, however, if the opening which this work
provides is followed; a less obfusticated understanding of the nuclear civilization that actu-
ally existed here in the, previously thought of as prehistoric, Americas may be acheived.
Some day the experts may actually see a direct connection or Nexus between the old
neareastern Mediterranean and the ancient new world. Until that day only those who are
willing to examine the evidence will understand.
If, on the other hand, the narrow, prejudiced view, which has been firmly ensconced in
the anthropological, academic orthodoxy of North American universities (principally those
of the U.S. of A. since the days of its creator, Civil War Major John Wesley Powell ), is rigid-
ly held to, we shall lose the posibility of gaining true knowledge. Powell's view, with its
mandated total contempt for any serious investigation of ancient ocean going contacts
between the old and new worlds remains de rigeur junk science to this day. Major Powell
was director of the Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of Ethnology during the years when
many artifacts were discovered particularly in the Mound Builder areas which clearly point-
ed to old world contacts and, in fact, constant intercourse. Powell viewed them all as fraud-
ulent. Powell's mindless bias is deeply held in the hearts and minds of American investi-
gators and throughout their hallowed halls of learning, Powell's tautology is respected
as holy writ. Anyone claiming otherwise is branded as a fool. Utilizing Powell's yardstick,
however, has produced only middling and erroneous findings in large part, among aca-
demics. Thinking themselves wise, they became fools. - Romans 1:22
As one can see, Powell's personal, nineteenth century, pre-Victorian doctrine has become
codified, congealed and petrified, thus, emasulating nearly the entire field of anthropologi-
cal investigators of things Mayan (not to mention all other studies of prehistoric America),
and, sad to say, has led several generations down the proverbial primrose garden path.
Purely because ot their foolish education, the majority have been incapable of making the
proper and logical mental connections, judgements and insights. The dominance of a pow-
erful academic ideology at work during their education has rendered this majority usless.
They are, by-and-large, products of an ignorant, educational dark age. They also bear
the guilt, in many cases, of bias before investigation.
Painting with such a broad brush is obviously not correct in all cases. There have to be
some trained individuals who will let the evidence speak for itself. The truth, if it be truth,
will come to the surface eventually, in spite of the pervasive orthodox doctrine which
denies it a hearing.
Meso-American Word List:
More words derived from ancient Shemetic, further demonstrating a direct and major
cultural connection between the ancient old and new worlds.
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Tlaloc rain god ::: ( talal-ak )dew surely (2919)
:: :: strew over surely (2926 +38)
The following are from: - The Aztecs the People of the Sun, by: Alfonso Caso , University
of Oklahoma Press 1958
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Ix Pus Teque deity: he of the :: :c : he, him, male (376)
- Ibid p. 64 broken foot ( ish pus toke ) ...step, stride (6585)
...cut off, sever (8496)
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Poch Teca travelling :: ,:c move (6328-9)
- Ibid p. 67 merchant ( pook tekah ) furnish, get, obtain
class camp, by impl.
... group of people (8497)
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Capulli barrios,districts :: ( khabelee ) measure, by impl. (2256)
-Ibid p. 90 of a city district, inheritance
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Huitzilopochtli a form of the ~:: :c :.. deliver, rescue (2020)
Toltec god: ( hutstslo po shtree ) (see 5337 & 5342)
smoking mirror: in the sense of
blue humming bird, greeness as a
Aztec war god M striking color.
[not necessarily green]
...this place here (6311)
...majesty (7861)
The brilliant planet Mars hovers as it appears to retrograde in its orbit, thereby the con-
cept of hovering may be understood. It is also a theory that Mars has made at least one,
perhaps as many a three, close approaches, or flybys, and had affected not only the earth's
orbit (by 5 and a quarter days), its polar stability, but its people; to the extent that others of
earth's tribes have attributed to Mars the title of War God; among them, the Greeks,
Romans and Assyro-Babylonians ( ie. Mars, Ares, Nergal & Huitzilopochtli of the Aztecs!).
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Huitzilopochtli (alternate) :: :: :c : . weapon of war (7589)
( hutsen lo po shit tlee )... not, negative (3808)
...this place, here (6311)
... push aside, contempt (7589)
...quiver (8522)
Weapon of war, here (whose) quiver is not pushed aside (therefore: ready to fight). A
good description of a pagan war god.
Note ( r) and ( l) are vocal equivalents in Shemetic languages.
So, this gods name had taken on a dual meaning at some historical point. probably as
Mars came close to the earth in one of its many close encounters.
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Neso Xochi the one who :: .:: bud, ( fem.) (5132)
- ibid p. 64 strews flowers ( nootsa shakees ) blossom
...sprout, grow (7823)
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Cem ana huac- king of the :: :: :: : :: name (8034)
tla toani world: ( shem ana huak tela tonaee: ) authority
-Ibid p. 94 ...everywhere (575)
...walk, go (1946)
...bent on (8511) purpose (8385)
My authority is whereever I go (the world) being bent on my purpose
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Cem ana huac-
tenocha tlal pan capital of the :c ::: : :: honor (8567)
world: ( tenocha talal pan ) attribute honor
- ibid, p. 94 ... govern. lead (5148)
...elevate eminent (8524)
...behold, respect (6435-7)
Authority goes wherever (world): attribute honor, respect high government.
Tamale: a treaditional Mexican food made of corn meal with meat stuffing.
Azteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Tamale Aztec food :: : little chamber (8372)
( ibid, p. 70 ) ( tah male ) ... filled, be full (4390)
A traditional Mexican tamale, is rolled masa (cornmeal), creating a small chamber which
is filled with meat, hence the filled chamber idea.
Toltec Word List:
Names and place names according to the Tolteca records:
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Huitzlampa land of the Sun c ::. :.. deliverance (2020)
( ibid p. 191) to which the tribe ( huts -tslam-pa ) ... shade, illusion (6754)
had migrated ...region (6285)
from Aztln (Hebrew conjunction)
Deliverance from the dark, shady and much colder regions (in the north)
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Hue-hue-tlapalan place from which ::. c :: : : ruin (1942)
the Toltecs came ( hwe hwe tlapalam ) doubling increases value
to Mexico perversity
...trouble (8513)
( They were defeated in Aztln by the distress, travail
Leni Lenape tribe, also known as the ...blow away (6284)
Deleware Indians, and were driven
southwards towards Mexico in roughly ... remote time past(5957)
1st to 2nd century A. D. ).
(Mound Builders of Ancient America p. 157 quoting B. de Bourbourg)
Note: Doubling; as in, hue-hue indicates greater amount.
Note: Again (m ) and (n) are vocal equivalents in Shemetic languages.
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Azcaputzalco city built after : .:. c, : eminent people (5794)
a disaster ( az kaputs- tsal ko ) ... finished, dead (7092)
...limping fallen (6761)
in adversity, now (3541)
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Tezcatlipoca deity: smoking ,c ~:, ~. image (6736-51)
( Ibid, p. 57 ) mirror: ( tsyr qytry poqah ) opaque object, idol
...smoke (s) (7008)
...clear sighted (6493)
, open eyes, seer
Image shaded with smoke through which clear sighted, wise one may see
Cioa- coatl
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Cioa- coatl the first goddess who : -(coatl): Eve, (2332)
brought forth... who bequeathed ( chawah ) -(coatl): first woman
the suffering of childbirth as a through whom
tribute to death... through whom sin and death came
sin came into the world (*)...Her is associated with serpent
name signified serpent woman and suffering of childbirth
Coatl: is the Toltec-Aztec word for serpent.
Eleswhere (s) and (c) have been used to transliterate the Hebrew letter () kh Josephus
utilized this transliteration in his works, where place names had the (), in the original, he
used (s), which is the phonetic equivalent of (c).
- History of the Conquest of Mexico and the Conquest of Peru, Prescott p. 694 also:
- Genesis 3:20ff.
Tl ahchi ual tepetl
Of all its churches, Cholula is famous for one: its tlahchiualtepetl or, artifical hill.
- Fair Gods and Stone Faces page 55
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
tl ahchi ual tepetl artifical hill : :c: ::. : :: mound, hill (8510)
( tel ayshee owal tophet el ) (376)
... infant (5764)
...cremation place (8613)
...mighty one, deity (410)
A hill made by men for infant, burnt sacrifice to the mighty one
...tombs on a mountain top where, according to torquemada, it had earlier been the
native custom to offer young children in sacrifice
- Fair Gods and Stone Faces, pages 173-
Toltec Drink
Vamos a tomar atole, p'que atole esta muy bueno - popular Mexican song
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Atole: a Mexican drink ::. compressed (6270)
with fruit, grain and ( athlay ) constringent
alcohol mixed together
Note: Athole Brose, a Scottish compound of oatmeal, honey and whiskey...
Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable , Classical Edition. page 72
Tolteca Meaning Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning #
Athole Brose: (Scottish) ::~: ::. compressed (6270)
( athole browth ) ... render clear (1267-62)
feed, eat food, meat
The Hebrew/ Scottish connection vis-a vis Scythian/Scutae is not a subject for this book.
However, the Sacce, Scuthae were Israelite tribes, and therefore originally Hebrew speak-
ers. Their histories are dealt with by Richard Clover, in his manuscript, the Sax. Therefore
the connection is drawn here, between the Scottish, Athole Brose and the Mexican Atole,
since they are the same drink with the same name. They reflect the same ancient world
tongue.- to quote Francisco Ximnez , who was referring to the Quich Maya language of the
conquest era- about the principal language of the world
This proto languatge of the ancient world, as some linguists call it, was Shemetic, of
that there cane be no reasonable doubt.
Mayanand Phoencian Infanticide
Infanticide, of course, is a well-known Kanaanite/Phoenician practice, that brought hor-
ror to the civilized nations of the Mediterranean in ancient times. The Phoenicians, and
they alone, observed this barbaric tradition. Naturally, since the Carthaginians also prac-
ticed infanticide, we must understand that they were nothing other than Phoenicians, called
Tyrinnians and Sidonians by the Romans, in deferrence to their ancient Phoenician
homes in Tyre and Sidon along the Levantine coast of Palestine. So we see another firm
connection between the Maya and the Kanaanite/ Hivites of Palestine. The Phoenicians and
the Hivites were related Kanaanite tribes, and they, as did the Maya after them, practiced
the singularly hideous and barbarous ritual of offering their own children to the gods in
times of national stress.
Those who would revise history to make Columbus into the white-male-Eurocentric
devil, and the native into a kind, ecologically pristine, noble savage, simply haven't
understood the true and bloody history of ancient meso-America. As bad as capitalism and
western civilization might have become, it simply pales by comparison, to the Aztec human
flesh-eaters of Mexico, were one foolish enough to suggest such a thing.
The Aztecs sacrificed hundreds of conquered warriors each day to Huitzilopotchtli, cut-
ting out their beating hearts with obsidian knives, and hurling the corpses down, to the
throngs waiting below, to become a major part of the daily protien intake of the citizens of
Tenochtitln. - from Bernal Diaz
The fact that the Spaniards tore down pagan idols of "Huichilobos" only to replace them
with their own pagan idols (statues) of Mary and Jeusus is actually rather ironic. It does
not follow, however, to say that those peculiar actions reflect the whole of western culture,
or its religions, as it comes head to head with a rising third world, nor does it mean that
one should approve of those past actions of the brutal, blood-thirsty, maniacally religious
Spanish conquistadores or the evil Spanish inquisition which followed their bloody boot-
Wht this is meant to convey is; that it is perfectly fine to be a member of the dominant,
western culture, which has given the world all of its major technological advances, even if
it is not politically correct, in some effete circles.
Obviously, Columbus did not discover the New World, but he surely did not ruin
something pristine and pure. One need not believe in Manifest Destiny to see what is
clear. What has replaced the evils of ancient America is not a perfect system, it has its evils
as well, but we do not sacrifice our children to the sun, nor eat our enemies merely to
maintain our daily protien levels.
How was America named?
Recently, in a letter to the American Instititute for Archaeological
Research, Mt .Vernon, New Hampshire, a letter was published from a Mr. Tom Strider. He
wrote of a book written by his friend, Wilbert Hernandez, entitled, The Blood of the
Conquistador, in which Wilbert cites a work of Ricardo Palma, ca.1502, entitled, Carta De
Las Indias. In this work it is claimed that the Spaniards of the crew of Columbus' fourth
voyage, while coasting Nicaragua, pointed to the land, and asked the Maya natives that
they had invited on board , what they called the place. These Quich understood that the
Spaniards wanted to know what the mountains (in the distance) were called, since they
seemed to be pointing at them. The Maya indicated Amerik meaning the summit of a
mountain range. The crew took Amerik to mean the name for the entire place. They , as
was their wont to do in such cases, Hispanized the word ( ie. Huitzilopotchli became
Huitzilobos), to Americ-a, substituting the (c) for the (k) sound. The returning Spaniards
reported the name as such and it has remained so, ever since.
The idea that Amerigo Vespucci was the source and inspiration for the naming of
America has always seemed a very weak hypothesis, because failing to have named the
place properly for its discoverer Columbus, Vespucci, theoretically wishing to name it for
himself, would have called it Vespuccilandia or some other equally ridiculous name. He,
most definitely would not have used his christian name because we have many instances
where areas and regions were named for individuals and in almost all cases the last name
is used. So to test this against the general theory being presented here:
Ameri k k
Hebrew (phonetic) Meaning Strongs #
~: (ameer) summit of a mountain (534)
,~ (rick) emptyness, worthless, of no use (7385)
Mayan: Amerik-a
Hebrew: ,~ ~:
It is true that mountain summits are generally wilderness areas that are useless to man,
at least in the sense that man does not live in those regions, however useful they may be
for wildlife, collecting water for later use during the hot season and providing defensive
walls from foreign intrusion. The Maya simply meant that no persons actually lived there.
So the Hebrew/Phoenician words amer/ryq are most likely the source for the origins of
the name America.
The Phoenician discovery
of the Americas
In Discovery of Ancient America this subject has been examined extensively. Other
authors and historians such as Cyrus Gordon, who has dealt with the Phoenicians in his
books (The Phoenicians and Before Columbus), have brought forth clear evidence of
ancient old world/new world connectiions, that is for anyone with a mind to understand.
Ancient writers such as Plato and Diodous and Aristotle have written much about the con-
tinent(s) which lay out in the great ocean, beyond the pillars of Hercules (straits of
Gibralter). It is only necessary to point out that the record of the Phoenician discovery of
the continent of South America, by accident, in about the 20th year of Hyriam, King of
Tyre is established.
Now there were two kings of Tyre, a father and a son with the name Hyriam. The first,
Hyriam I, was roughly contemporaneous with David, king of Israel (1000 B.C. to 961 B.C.),
and his son Hyriam II, was contemporaneous with David's successor, Solomon (963 B.C. to
924 B.C). So it is safe to say that sometime between roughly, 1000 B.C. to perhaps 920
B.C. the first, true voyage of discovery took place. The voyage began at Ezion Geber in the
Gulf of Aqaba, in the fifteenth year of Hyriam the Mighty king. This voyage is recorded
on the Paraiba Inscription, found in Brazil in 1862, and in a Mediterranean written record
nearly 900 years later. Diodorus of Siciliy wrote of the returning Phoenicians in his work,
(Diodorus 20:1-4).Cyrus Gordon believes that this Hyriam, was Hyriam III of 553-533
B.C., based on the script used. So the voyage would have begun, according to Dr. Gordon,
in 534 B.C. and ended, in Brazil, in 532 B.C. (Before Columbus p.125).
It is no longer possible to claim, as some have done in the past, that the Paraiba
Inscription is a fake. Cyrus Gordon has demonstrated that the tri-partate form and certain
idiomatic peculiarities, which are found in the document, were totally unknown in 1862,
and even in the year of its modern re-discovery 1967, several features were not yet known
to modern linguists and historians. Even if some still cry fake, the evidence that Diodorus
wrote of the same history in the first century B.C. is so compelling as to deny any further
argument. The story must be true if he, an independent third party, wrote of the returning
Kanaanites over two thousand years ago.
Other records exist which help prove the point that the Phoenician/Kanaanites were the
actual discoverers of the Americas, and they have been presented in Discovery of Ancient
America, of course. We have discussed the invalidity of the Asian land-bridge theory,
which flies in the face of overwhelming evidence that the early settlers and explorers came
by ship over the Atlantic Ocean nearly three thousand years ago, most definitely NOT via
Asia. And finally, we have also mentioned the real reason that such false ideas prevail. It
is that they are based completely on the false, theoretical, religion of evolution. The multi-
thousand and even multi-million year figures which are bandied about by these true believ-
ers is a phenominal thing to hear and see. With no basis in fact, but a very strong belief in
the hypothetical, philosophical theories of James Hutton and Charles Lyell, they conclude
that their brand of faith is science, and all else is foolishness, native American historical
records to the contrary notwithstanding.
Hopi legends
Now, we have the final proof that the Amerindian populations did not migrate over the
arctic regions, as is popularly supposed by evolution-minded archaeologists and anthropolo-
gists. That proof: the ancient, Mayan language was Shemetic. The red-skinned Amerindian
tribes were, by-and-large, Mediterranean, Kanaanite peoples who had been forced, by wars,
to relocate twice previously.
For another striking parallel between Amerindian and Kanaanite cultures, note the
History of the Kanaanite people:
First ). The ancient world was destroyed by a flood because of sin
(which is a blatant disregard for the Higher laws). This
story is pervasive in all of the ancient cultures.
Second ). The Kanaanites (Phoenicians) were driven out of Palestineand the coastland
environs by the Israelite invasion and by later wars, which displaced them to
Third ). The Carthaginians (displaced Phoenicians) were againdisplaced, this time by
the Romans, after three vicious (Punic)wars. It was at this time that they
abandoned the Mediterranean altogether, to set out for the secret land, on the
other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
Fourth ).They were, and are presently here in the fourth estate.
Please note that the ancient ceremonial language of the Hopi is under discussion here,
not the present form. To be sure, many original words must have filtered through, remain-
ing in use today, but it would be false to say that the original Kanaanite language remains
totally intact
From, The Book of the HOPI by Frank Waters
The First World, or Tokpela, which ( tqp = p l-h ) = :.c c,: - 8663/6466), in
Shemetic means: the Makers Authority was a, perfect pattern of creation...being in,
unison with the creator. This world was destroyed because, to quote the Hopi, of a dis-
regard for laws ( Book of the Hopi, Waters pp. 3-205 ). The Biblical flood of Noah is, of
course, brought to mind here, where the entire world of men, save eight individuals, was
destroyed because of a disregard for the laws - Genesis 6:5.
The Second World was Tokpa (Shemetic, authority. This word implies similarity to
the first world, but lacking the maker, the word pl. Therefore meaning: authority of
man [by implication] the maker has withdrawn). The second Hopi world, Topka, was
destroyed by rival rulers, strife and war ( Book of the Hopi, Waters pp.12-205 ). This is
nothing other than the eviction of the Kanaanites from the promised land by the Israelites
under the leadership of General Yahshua the son of Nun, and the later defeat of the
Kanaanites under Alexander the Great..
The Third World of the Hopi or, kuskurza
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
::: (kush) the land of Cush, or Africa: ( 3568)
:~: (kursa) throne. ( 3764 )
Here is the description of the removal of the Phoenician throne from Tyre and Sidon,
which were situated in ancient Phoenicia, to the western Mediterranean city of Carthage (in
the land of :~: ::: in Africa), by Elisa the daughter of Pygmalion the Phoenician
king in 814 B.C. (the founding date of Carthage). The name kuskurza, for Carthage, is very
appropriate, indeed.
Hopi: kuskurza
Hebrew: :~: :::
Meaning: OUR THRONE IN AFRICA. This fits Kanaanite history.
The Third World, was destroyed by rival rulers and strife and war, to quote again,
The - Book of the Hopi. p. 205. This destruction of Carthage is well known and the ferocity
with which the Romans undertook it has few equals in history. The Romans, after sacking
Carthage at the close of the Third Punic War in 146 B.C. salted the ground so that no one
could again rebuild the city of Carthage. The Carthaginians (Phoenicians) would have
looked upon this as ending a world by, rival rulers, strife and war.
The Fourth World or, Tu-waqachi ( Ibid. p 21-205 ), is the world of the present.
This corresponds to life in the Americas. To the Maya, it was Quichand they were called
the Quechean Civilization - Carmack.
the Algonquian/Celts it was called Quechee ( Quechee, Vermont, see Discovery of Ancient
America, p. 64 ) In The Book of the Hopi, ...and it is up to them to choose their way
(right or wrong); that they should strive to make this Fourth World perfect as it was in
the beginning. - Book of the Hopi. p. 205.
Tu-waqachi, Hopi fourth (present) world.
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
: (tah) designating (8376)
:. (owah) perverse (5773)
., (Qets-ee) extremity, border, end (7093)
Comparison / Transliteration:
Hopi: Tu wa qachi
Hebrew: ., :. :
Phonetic: (tah-wah qets-ee)
Hebrew meaning: (This fourth world) DESIGNATES (the)
PERVERSE EXTERMITY (to which we have come)
The land of escape on the other side of the world would be viewed as inferior, and back-
ward or even perverse by comparison to the high order of civilization experienced in the last
World. You see, even we call Europe the Old World.
So we see in the Hopi Mythology a strange parallel to the Biblical history and the true
history of the Kanaanites of the Mediterranean.
In the Hopi legends, the creator is called Ta-iowa. This is interesting, because in the
Hebrew Bible the creator is called : eeah- ooeh or Yahweh). Ta, (teo), in this usage
means god. The only Hebrew equivalent is: ::( te'ow / 8377 wild bull, ox). This had been,
periodically, an object of worship for the Israelites, hence a god, ( Golden Calf ) and the
probable source for the Greek Theo:" which also means god.
The creation, by Ta-iowa, of a subordinate, creator being closely follows the Hebrew
story of the lesser : (Yahweh/ eeahooeh), The son of :(Yahweh) the Father. In the
Hopi legend, he is known as the nephew of Ta-iowa. In this frame of reference Ta-iowa
would be tantamount to calling Yahweh a bull or ox. It is precisely because of misrepresen-
tations and pagan imagery such as this, that Israel was chastised and disposessed by
Yahweh. The other nations would see these pagan practices and assume that Yahweh was to
be worshipped in this manner. This is why Yahweh stated My name is blasphemed
among the nations because of you (Israel) - Romans 2:24, and Isaiah 52:5
The Hopi creator is called Soutuknang (Soo-tooknang). Come see what your work
looks like now! It is very good, said Ta-iowa. It is ready now for human life, the
final touch to complete my plan. - The book of the Hopi, pp. 3-5.
And he saw that it was good. The Genesis parallel is clear, Yahweh, the son of Yahweh.
- see Proverbs 30:4, does the creating in the name of the Father. The name of the Hopi,
creator, nephew seems odd to English speakers, however, until we examine it in Hebrew.
Soutuknang: creator/nephew ( Hopi )
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
::: (soot) stir up, move (5496)
::: (took) cutting to pieces (8496)
.: (nahag) proceed (5090)
Hebrew: .: ::: :::
Phonetic: (soot-took-nahag)
(to create by context).
This translation is consistent with the Hebrew usage in Genesis I of ~: (bara), mean-
ing create by cutting to pieces, to dispatch (kill) or cut down. This passage in Genesis was
not intended to mean an original creation, but the destruction of what had gone before, cul-
minating with a new creation, that of man and mammals. The reptile age was destroyed and
a new world was created out of the, ::: :: (tohu wa- bohu) waste and indistinguish-
able ruin, of the previous world.
Argue as they may, the creation Scientists who claim that men and dinosaurs walked
together and were part of the creation that involved Adam, have neither understood the
Bible in the Hebrew original, nor properly read the geologic record. The geologic column
demands that there were three separate ages, the one prior to the KT boundary disaster, and
the one after it covered with the sediments of the great flood, and finally our own age.
For further proof, and discussion of the geological significance of the Hebrew scripture, see,
The Day the Leviathan All Died. ( ISAC Press Columbus GA 1993 ).
No nezo shi
Nonezoshi = (rainbow turned to stone) Hopi name for the great
Rainbow arch in Arizona. - AERO magazine 6/85 p.34
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
: (naw) now (4994)
.: (natsach) bright object at a (5331-2)
distance, brilliant color
:: (sheshee) marble (8336)
Hopi: No nezo shi
Hebrew: :: .: :
Phonetic: (naw natsakh shshee)
(brilliant object is the rainbow)
The insanity of civilization was demonstrated by the movie entitled "Coyanasquatsi." From
people being crowded into narrow passageways and being forced along like sausages on a
conveyor belt, to ruined neighborhoods of the Bronx, the poor quality of modern urban
life was demonstrated.
Coyanasquatsi = (life gone crazy, out of step, needing change)
Hopi, movie title, quoted from a Hopi dictionary.
Hebrew Meaning Strongs #
(khay) life (2417)
: (yanah) vex, do violence, (3238)
rage, destroy
.,: (shaqats) abominable, filthy, polluted,
utterly detestable (8262)
(ee) -my (Hebrew grammatical)
Hopi: Coyanasquatsi
Hebrew: .,: :
Phonetic: khay-yana-shaqats -ee
Example of a letter that has incorrect word breaks
This letter was written to my wife from a friend in Mexico. It is an example of what margin-
ally literate people do with written language. It is an example shown to counter the argument
of linguists, that one cannot break up the words and sentences such as I have done in my
linguistic work. They have argued that translators must maintain the same word breaks that
the conquest period Mayans used in their transliteration. In practice their rule is invalid.
The natives who transliterated these famous Mayan stories, such as the Popol Vuh, into the
new, Roman-Spanish phonetic alphabet were not linguists, and therefore, did not necessarily
follow the modern philologists linguistic rule book. Here then, is the example:
a 29 de Febrero de 1988 Seora delia / A 29 Febrero de 1988 Seora Deal
Seora Velia mimuistimada amiga La pre / Seora Velia, mi muy estimada amiga la pre-
Sete mesir-bePara SaLudarLa desiando guese / sente, me sirve pare saludarla deseando que se
encu-etre Vien encon Pania de SuesPoS0/ encuent ra bien encompania de su esposo.
dela quede misedesPide esbuena grasias / De la que de mi se despide es buena, gracias
adio idesPudesaludaz la Paso Adesir LeLosigi / a dios. Y despues saludos. Lo paso a decirle lo sig-
ente Pues miRese ora biqui doiContestasion / uiente. Pues, mira Seora Vickie, doy con-
testacion asucarta dondemedise que mies Poso / a su carta donde me dice que mi esposo
Ricardo anda aReglando PaPeles para note / Ricardo anda arreglando papeles para no te
pendiente Conla migrasion paraque lamigra / pendiente con la migracion, para que la migra
nolo agare Pues mire senora media mucho gus / no lo agare, pues. Mira Seora me dia mucho gus-
to que miesPoso pueda areglar uper miso / to que mi esposo pueda arreglar su permiso.
itan bien medio gusto Porque usted / Y tan bien me dio gusto porque Usted
me esqribo miincon traba mui triste Por / me escribio. Me encontraba muy triste por
que ricarrdo nome escriba nisabia de el / que Ricardo no me escriba, ni sabia de el.
ipue es Real mente medio gusto por que / Y pues, realmente me dio gusto por que
(side 2)
porque usted SeaCordo demi ime / porque Usted se acordo de mi, Y me
esPliCa muibi ende Ricardo mire seora / explica muy bien de Ricardo. Mira Seora,
biqui llotengo ganas de cono serla / Vickie, Yo tengo ganas de conocerla
bien llaen el retrad(t)o llala Conosco Pero / bien. Ya en retrato, ya la conosco. Pero
lloque siera que ricardo melle baRa Pero / yo quisera que Ricardo me llevare. Pero
nose pueda llasiqui era laCo nosco en eRetrato / no se pueda. Ya si quiera la conosco en retrato
us tede nomeco nose ami detodos modos Soi / Usted no me conose a mi, de todos modos. Soy
Su amiga mire para que meconos Ca le / su amiga. Mira, para que me conosca, le
boi aman dar mefoto el lasi giente Carrta / voy a mandar mi foto en la siguiente carta
que llole esCriba en esta Carta noselo mando / que yo le escriba. En esta carta no se lo mando
Porque nolo tengo mesinito irPara que me lo / porque no lo tengo. Me siento ir para que me lo
nese sito irPar Mise traten mire llono / nesesito ir para me se traten, mire yo no
esPero que le enti enda amiletra porqe / espero que le entienda mi letra, porque
llanose esCri bir esque Case notube escuela / yo no se escribir, es que, casi no tuve escuela.
Noestu die Case pues escuan to ledise suamiga / No estudie. Casi, pues, es cuanto le dice su amiga
Sara m- salude me asu esPoso / Sara M -. Saludame a su esposo
iusd Resiba tan bien saludos desuamiga sara / Y Ustd. reciba tan bien saludos de su amiga Sara.
Contes teme / Contestame
Abbreviations used in this book
DDA Discovery of Ancient America, (Deal)
PPV Popol Vuh, (Recinos, Goetz, Morley)
QC Quichean Civilization, (Carmack)
(#####) SEC Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible
Aero Magazine, June, 1985
Bancroft, Hubert Howe, The Native Races, vol. III, The History Company, Publishers, San
Francisco, 1886
Bolio, Jose The Rattlesnake School, Yucatan, Mexico
Burland, C. A., The Gods of Mexico, G. P. Putnams Sons, New York, 1967
Carmack, Robert, The Quich Annals of Utitln, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1981
Carmack, Robert, The Quichean Civilization , (Titulo Coyi) University of California Press,
Berkely and Los Angeles, 1973
Ceram, Gods, Graves and Scholars, Bantam Books, New York, 1967
Craine, & Raindorp, Codex Perez and The Book of Chilam Balam of Mani, University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1979
Deal, David A. Discovery of Ancient America, Kherem La Yah Press, Vista (ex Irvine)
California, 1984
Deal, David A., The Day Behemoth & Leviathan Died, ISAC Press, Columbus GA 1993
Green, Jay, p. Sr., The Interlinear Bible, Vols. I, II, III. Hendrickson
Gordon, Cyrus H., Before Columbus, Crown publishers, NY, 1971
Irwin, Constance, Fair Gods and Stone Faces, St Martins Press NY
Hislop, Alexander, The Two Babylons, Loizeaux Bros. Inc. Neptune NJ, 1959
Kelly. Palerm, The Tajin Totonac, The Smithsonian Institute of Social Anthropology, No.13,
Government Printing Office, 1952
Lasky, L.C., The Bestiary of Christ, Parabola Books, NY 1991
McKusik, Marshall, Biblical Archeologist, summer 1979
Nelson, Ralph, Popol Vuh, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Mass. 1976
Prescott. William H., History of the Conquest of Mexico & History of the Conquest of Peru,
The Modern Library, New York
Recinos, Goetz, Morley Popol Vuh The Sacred Book of the Ancient Maya, University of
Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK, 1983
Recinos, Goetz, The Annals of The Cakchiquels, Chonay, Goetz, Titulo de los Senores de
Totonicapan, U. Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1979
Sorrenson, John L. The Possibility of Near Eastern - MesoAmerican Culture Contact,
Symposium paper, 1967
Strong, James, The New Strongs Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Nelson, Nashville,
Stuart, George and Gene The Mysterious Maya National Geographic Society, Washington
D.C. 1977
Teadlock, Dennis (personal communication) James H. Mcnulty Prof. S.U.N.Y Buffalo NY,
Thompson, J. Eric S, The Rise and Fall of Maya Civilization, University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman, 1977
Thompson, J. Eric S, Maya Archaeologist, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 1975
Velikovsky, I. Ages in Chaos, Doubleday, Garden City NY, 1952
Waters, Frank. The Book of the Hopi, Penguin, New York, NY, 1977
Special Note:
No claim is made by the author that the various pieces of Mayan art represent the
ideas that they accompany. These are merely for graphic enhancement and visual interest.
Special Note:
With respect to the Introduction of this book, I pointed out to Dr. Gordon, in a telephone conversation we
had before its publication, that Jews as well as Samaritans were commanded to place the commandments as
a fontlet before their eyes, by placing the commandments on their gates and doorposts of their homes. I
cited Deuteronomy 6:6-9.
This being true, it is not axiomatic or factual in the slightest, that Samaritans placed the Ten Command-
ment stone at Los Lunas, ( Hidden Mountain ) New Mexico, as Dr Gordon suggests, rather, Jews were most
likely responsible. It is true that since then, Jews have mutated this scripture, placing tiffilin or phalactaries
on their foreheads and arms, even though this was never the meaning of the scripture. It is clear that by plac-
ing the commandments of Yahweh on ones gates and doorposts, it would always keep those command-
ments of Yahweh, as frontlets before their eyes. Instead, observant, orthodox Jews wear little boxes on
their forheads, and tie leather straps to their arms, and refuse to place the commandments on their gates and
doorposts ( mezuzot ). Dr. Gordons response was, Well, the Jews probably have it wrong then.