Unmasking AIT

[Husky]

Post 7/7 - a possibly "Common Origin of Supersnake Stories from Prehistory" (but it's not PIE chade



cryptomundo.com/cryptotourism/giant-snakes-of-japan-2/

The Giant Mystery Snakes Of Japan

and "the Nabau" supersnake collective memory of the Indonesians of Borneo could make more sense in light of



giantconstrictingsnakes.com/CommonOrigin.html

Evidence for a Common Origin of Supersnake Stories from Prehistory



The intermingling of supersnakes and mythological snakes makes these stories difficult to categorize. While examining the literature on folklore and myths I was startled by the similarity of the Great Water Snake of South African peoples and the Rainbow Serpent Myth of the Australian Aborigines.



The Great Snakes of the Khoekhoen and /Xam



Snakes play an important role in the belief systems of many peoples and confusing mythological snakes with real snakes has contributed significantly to supersnake stories. However, African supersnake and mythological snake stories are perhaps more relevant as ancestral stories. As humans moved out of African to colonize Eurasia they carried their mythologies with them and it is entirely possible that the true mother of all supersnake stories lies within African cultures.



The hunter-gathers and early agricultural peoples of southern Africa painted large snakes in their rock art. Hoff (1997) determined that the Khoekhoen refer to large snakes with supernatural powers as Great Snakes. Interviews with members of the Khoekhoenin, the Northern Cape and southern Namibia and descendants of the /Xam, a group previously believed extinct, from the Upper Karoo area provided the basis for Hoff’s work. The Khoekhoen believe in huge, train sized snakes they call Great Snakes which are divided into two categories: aquatic and terrestrial. The terrestrial Great Snake is the Veld Snake which likes water, knows when rain is coming, and is active in the veld after a rain. Killing a Veld Snake will cause drought or torrential rains and lighting. To the Khoekhoen, Great Snakes are real, supernatural beings not just part of their folklore, and live south of Namibia, while to the north they are replaced by other snakes.

The /Xam do not believe in the Veld Snake, but the Water Snake is important in their belief system. The Water Snake is a color- and shape-shifter so that it can catch people. To the /Xam the Water Snake can instill sexual potency and health by licking a person or spitting into their mouth. But, the Khoekhoen also believe it will also eat humans who venture to close, or it may enter a person’s home to catch someone he is in love with. It kills by stabbing the victim with its tongue, removing a person’s brain by inserting its tongue into its nose, and sucking out a person’s blood. Water snakes also seduce women and take them underwater for copulation. The Water Snake does not like menstruating women and the snake may cause menstruating humans to break out in blisters. They also have the power to change a person into a frog. Hoff suggests that the /Xam’s more positive view is older and that both groups originally regarded the Water Snake as a positive force.

(The Greek River God Achelous - known from "Cornucopia" narrative - who fought with Herakles is a shapeshifter, as some river Gods are. He competed with Herakles over Deianara. Took a form of serpent and horned bull. Some Asian River God dragons also shapeshift. As do many others.)





The Australian Rainbow Serpent

[...]

The oldest Rainbow Serpent paintings are Arnhem Land rock art dated at 6000–8000 YBP. Two types of Rainbow Serpents are reflected in Aboriginal oral history, mythology, and art: the female Yingarna, the mother and original creator being; and the male Ngalyod, a transformer of the land. They often live in deep waterholes below waterfalls. Rainbow Serpents are sources of creation, unity, peace, and cooperation, as well as destruction. The creature is said to shape landscapes; generate rain; and heal the sick; while swallowing people, or drowned them, disfigured others with sores and bringing weakness, illness, and death.

[...]

Using computer analysis of images and dating rock art Taçon et al. (1996) say that the first images of Rainbow Serpents appear in Yam period, about 6000 YBP, and that these set the pattern for all following images: a snake-like body, curved horse-like heads, tails that are pointed or spiked, and an assortment appendages, including wispy tendrils and ear-like projections. They concluded that the first Rainbow Serpent was based upon the Ribboned Pipefish, Haliichthys taeniophora (Family Syngnathidae), which occurs in the seas around Irian Jaya, and the coast of northern Australia from Shark Bay in Western Australia to the Torres Strait. This does not surprise me since Radciffle-Brown (1926) wrote, “At Cape York the rainbow is regarded not as a snake, but as a huge fish that lives far out to sea.” It should be note that the pipefish is not a huge animal.



(Actually, that description could perhaps pass for an Asian dragon: "an assortment appendages, including wispy tendrils and ear-like projections". The Asian "dragon" looks serpentine, it does not look like the western dragon.

And is Achelous the Greek River God not depicted with a horned bulls-head - which is sort of like a horse head in some respects - and with a serpent body?

Zambezi River God's appearance is described as serpent body but a different head too, though a fish's head. As well as like a whirlwind in part.

All sounds sort of like a water chimera. Coincidentally, Chimeras themselves are said to be related to Typhon and the Hydra.)



Speculation that the Rainbow Serpent’s true identity was a species of the now extinct family Madtsoidae (genera Wonambi and Yurlunggur) has been expressed by several authors (Scanlon and Lee, 2002; Freeman, 2003). Fossils of these snakes occur worldwide, and most became extinct 25-15 MYA, however, there is evidence that they survived in Australian until at least 100,000 YBP. If they hung on until 60,000 YBP humans may have had contact with them. Some rivaled or exceed the lengths of modern day giant snakes, but as far as we know they lacked supernatural powers and horns on their heads. It seems more probable that supersnakes and mythical snakes were originally based upon the African Python, Python seba and Python natalensis; or, some other, now extinct large snake that lived in Africa.



[...]



Origin of the Caribs, A Neotropical Giant Mythological Snake Story



In northern South America the Carib Indians of the upper Pomeroon River of Guyana have a story about their origin that starts with a water-camudi (an anaconda) having an Indian woman for a sweetheart. During the day he took the form of a snake, at night he became human. The woman became pregnant and gave birth to a baby camudi. The woman’s family became suspicious and discovered the nature of her secret offspring. Her brothers killed the snakes; they cut the baby into pieces in a remote part of the forest. Months later they were hunting near the location of the slaughter and found houses and people, the pieces of the snake had grown into the ancestors of the Carib nation (Roth, 1915). In the Pakaraima Mountains of Guyana the locals believe that a large camoodie guards natural resources and that it will show its displeasure at fishermen by causing excessive rain to fall and will kill and swallow several people at a time. The Caribs also have a giant water dwelling snake Okoyumo, which is like an anaconda but much bigger and likes menstruating women.



Thus, there is evidence that giant snakes played a role in the belief systems, folklore, and religions of peoples of Africa, India, Australia and South America. Snakes in the rock art of Africa, India, Australia, and the Americas have been documented. Often these shape-shifting snakes have appendages coming off their heads: horns, crests, and plumes. They cause rain to fall, alter the landscape, and have a duality of character that allows them to be both dangerous and beneficial to humans. The ancestral story most likely originated in Africa, where the Great Water Snakes are often given horns (from the antelope which is important to the African cultures).

Chinese Dragons certainly look like they have horns and appendages/plumey stuff coming off their heads, if you think about it.

Further, the appearance of the more cosmic-level Gong Gong of the Chinese also fits in with how the face looks different from the serpentine body:

[color="#800080"][Gonggong=][/color] Chinese water god or sea monster who is often depicted in Chinese mythology, folktales, and religious stories as having red hair and the tail of a serpent (or dragon).

What the above article on supersnakes does indicate is that there are and long have been populations insisting on giant weather-controlling magical serpents everywhere. On this point, the above link insists on divergent evolution from Africa. However, as Africans (such as of the Zambezi River) and E Asians (such as the Japanese etc) insist they can see their Gods [at least when the Gods take on forms visible to them], we need not insist this is merely cultural memory/shared prehistoric mythology.

But in any case, weather controlling giant serpents/dragons are not original Oryan invention that was passed on to other people. Other people may have traditions where they live with the situation - Zambezi River God is benign - or accept the price (self-sacrifice) or take action into their own hands (fight the Giant River Snake) or their other Gods may descend and restrain the snake themselves (Susano-o, etc). Often by trickery (food, wine, sake - like the soma).



There's no need for PIE Oryan excuses / for insisting PIE's must have given rise to the "trope".

If *I* can look up this sort of stuff, any moron can do better. Question is, why didn't PIE-ist claimants of "chaoskamp is originally a PIE trope" look it up?





Also, why isn't - say - human sacrifice to the serpent/dragon part of the trope? Or a localised wreckage - not necessarily a national or even cosmic one - threatened by local water creature (such as a local Chinese River dragon or local Japanese serpent)? Both are otherwise so common, after all. Because patterns with other countries could then be formed: Japan and China with Africa and Greece/Troy, say. [E.g. Troy had visitations by that sea monster, sent to Troy's king Laomedon by Poseidon as punishment for not paying fair wages when Poseidon and Apollo worked for him undercover. The sea creature caused people and the fruit/plants of the land to perish. It was oracled the sea monster could only be pacified by sacrificing Laomedon's daughter. Hercules, helped by Athena, slew the beast. Laomedon went back on the promised wages yet again, and Hercules destroyed Troy in revenge. This was an old tradition even in the time of Homer's Iliad, as a protective wall structure that Athena built for Hercules on the beach still remained. <- Some new features in common with Susano-o and Ghanaan etc cases concerning Watery Serpents killed by God or hero.]





But no. PIE-ists insist on carefully selecting patterns that favour belief in PIE-ism (and not with evidence either: "potentially" transmitted to Japan from PIE originally is not "evidence" and is asking for belief). Not to mention that PIE-ists totally wear blinkers to anything in the rest of the (i.e. non-"IE") world - owing to obsession/one-track mind - and so come off looking really ignorant to any casual onlooker with any modicum of general knowledge that can see the obvious holes. [E.g. some years back they essentially declared that "Sati is IE", as Bernard Lewis and then Elst did (see latter's Dutch article on Sati from the 1990s or thereabouts and which he still made additions/notes to later, in >=2000). Never mind that - as per Elst's re-definition of Sati - the ancient Chinese for example had such "Sati" too. Which at least Elst should have known already - or so one thought - for being not just an indologist, but a 'sinologist' too, and for having generally more sense than other indologists. I mean, the Chinese case was known since at the very least the 1980s or so, when a children's educational book mentioning the relevant info was printed, and who knows for how many decades or centuries longer than that? Never mind. Elst still comes off looking good in comparison to the "chaoskampf is potentially hence actually originally PIE [and so the Japanese *must* have borrowed]" types. Oh yeah, *sure*, that's how it is us: But - until you prove that transmission with hard evidence, not theorising let alone guessing - know that that's just a belief. Whether Proto-IndoEuropeans existed and consequently had a religion/beliefs/credo or not, PIE-ists certainly do.]



The real answer is: E Asian (and African etc) heathens' heathenisms being living religions and their Gods being known to be real to the ethnic natives still loyal to their ancestral religions, it turns out that in *their* cases - if no one else's - this ... alleged "motif/trope" is independently derived, being indeed true for their localities. I.e. no common ur-mythology let alone PIE-ism thesis needs to be submitted in order to explain the "God [or human] vs magical dragon [or serpent]" phenomenon among them. They're not related to IE or via IE. Can leave them alone. As in, PIE-ists should Back. Off.