I agree with most of what you wrote. However, not everything, of course.
Imagine the millions and billions (of $) Egypt could make if this ancient wonder of the world was uncovered (and restored) and opened for tourism! I'd pay to go and see it, without a hesitation.
Since economic boost through tourism is more than certain (after a successful excavation of this structure) then what is holding back the Egyptians from letting archeological expeditions proceed with the work?
Dr. Hawass has been tried for involvement in (alleged) theft of ancient artifacts, corruption accusations against him have been made. He is in good relations with National Geographic and overall a powerful figure in the world of Egyptology/Archeology.
To me, only a naïve person would listen to what this self proclaimed expert has to say. It's clearly stated that he was using intimidation when he tried to convince the Metaha team not to reveal their finds to general public.
I know the United States and the Ottoman Empire were on opposite sides during World War 1, but did they ever fight directly against each other on the battlefield? If so, can someone name any of the battles they had against each other?
I don't think they were at war. The US was an Associated Power, not an Ally. The ostensible reason for US entry into the war, unrestricted submarine warfare, was nothing to do with the Ottomans. Likewise, the Ottomans already had their hands full losing to the British Empire.I know the United States and the Ottoman Empire were on opposite sides during World War 1, but did they ever fight directly against each other on the battlefield? If so, can someone name any of the battles they had against each other?
he left Normandy and other French holdings to his oldest son and England to a younger son. Was William slighting his older son
I don't think they were at war. The US was an Associated Power, not an Ally. The ostensible reason for US entry into the war, unrestricted submarine warfare, was nothing to do with the Ottomans. Likewise, the Ottomans already had their hands full losing to the British Empire.
Gavelkind was the concept that you split up your land amongst your sons and is one of the main reasons that Charlemagne's empire crumbled after his death. I believe that William the Conqueror saw the Duchy of Normandy as more prestigious than his English holdings, hence he left his primary title to his eldest son and so on.
No - he considered Normandy and other French holdings as more valuable than England.
The Arctic Home in the Vedas is a book on the origin of Aryans by Lokmanya Bâl Gangâdhar Tilak, a mathematician turned astronomer, historian, journalist, philosopher and political leader of India during 1880 to 1920. It propounded the theory that the North Pole was the original home of Aryans during pre-glacial period which they had to leave due to the ice deluge around 8000 B.C. and had to migrate to the Northern parts of Europe and Asia in search of lands for new settlements. In support to his theory Tilak has presented certain Vedic hymns, Avestic passages, Vedic chronology and Vedic calendars with interpretations of the contents in detail. The book was written at the end of 1898, but was first published in March 1903 in Pune.
(...)
Evidence in support of the theory:
1) Vedic Evidences
Particulars of Hymns and Verses in ten Mandalas of Rigveda are given. For example Hymn 1, Verse 2, Page 459.
Particulars of Passages in Taittiriya Samhita are given. For example Passage I, 3, 9, 2, Page 91.
Particulars of Hymns in Vajasaneyi Samhita are given.
Particulars of Sama Veda Samhita are given.
Particulars of Atharva Veda Samhita are given.
Particulars of Aitareya Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Kauhorsehockyaki Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Taittiriya Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Shatapatha Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Tandya Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Sadvimsha Brahmana are given.
Particulars of Taittiriya Aranyaka are given.
Particulars of Upanishads are given.
2) Avestic Evidences
Particulars of Vendidad passages are given.
Particulars of Yashts passages are given.
Particulars of Yasna passages are given.
Influence:
The Arctic Home in the Vedas has been cited in the works of Julius Evola, Savitri Devi, Rene Guenon, Jean Haudry and John G. Bennett.
Whyte also analysed the ‘haplotypes’ (groups of closely linked genes) carried on mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited only through the female line. Each population has a unique range of haplotypes. While Europeans have over 100 haplotypes in a particular region of DNA, studies so far have only found four different Maori haplotypes in the same region.
“The reason for this difference is what we call a genetic bottleneck. When people leave an island to go to the next island, obviously not everybody gets on the boat, so some of the genetic diversity is being lost,” she said. “Some of the maternal lineages may not have got on the boat, so they’re not carried on to the next place.”
Whyte has now identified 10 haplotypes in New Zealand Maori. “From that we have worked out that 56 women came to New Zealand to create the diversity of today’s population,” she added.
Whyte said these findings were consistent with Maori legend.
“The story I was told when I was growing up is that there was a fleet of seven great waka (canoes) that came to New Zealand," she said. "Every tribe knows which waka their ancestors arrived in. My ancestors were in a waka called Takitimu.”
“There might have been 20 people travelling in a canoe the size of a waka. Seven waka, that’s about 140 people. And if, as we think, about half or 56 of these people happen to be women, it does seem to tie in.”
The strongest geographic indicator of the location where PIE was spoken is the fact that PIE and Proto-Uralic (PU) appear to have been geographic neighbors. They had core vocabulary items that look suspiciously similar ('name', 'water') and similar-looking pronouns (Ringe 1997; Janhunen 2000, 2001; Koivulehto 2001; Kallio 2001; Salminen 2001; Witzel 2003; Parpola 2012). One kind of relationship between PIE and PU that would account for the apparently shared pronouns, noun endings, and basic vocabulary would be ancestral: The two protolanguages could have shared a very ancient common ancestor, perhaps a broadly related set of intergrading dialects spoken by hunters at the end of the Pleistocene.
Why did Charlemagne fail to conquer the Iberian Muslims?
Because he didn't have Polish Winged Hussars.
It places the OT into the exact same category that all other 'historical' documents from that time period go into. They are useful for giving us an understanding of what the writers thought and, when corroborated with other information, can be useful as a historical record.Having watched the films "The Ten Commandments" and the more recent "Exodus: God and Kings", I was led to believe that the Exodus was an actual event (frogs, plagues, locusts, etc. excluded). However, in reading Wikipedia: The Exodus, no archaeological evidence has been found c.a. 1250 BCE. Does this effectively place the entire Old Testament's historicity into question?
Having watched the films "The Ten Commandments" and the more recent "Exodus: God and Kings", I was led to believe that the Exodus was an actual event (frogs, plagues, locusts, etc. excluded). However, in reading Wikipedia: The Exodus, no archaeological evidence has been found c.a. 1250 BCE. Does this effectively place the entire Old Testament's historicity into question?