Jason Colavito who participated in the recent attack on Graham and his latest book, Before America:
has spotted me, taken aim and fired!
The opening lines of this hit piece are dedicated to one of his favourite topics, Ancient Aliens, unrelated to the title of the article. But then and only then, it’s my turn, sandwiched between Ancient Aliens and some obscure comparison to the Twilight Zone.
Jason’s title strongly implies that I - and not the Sumerian symbols themselves - am the holder of secrets, an indication of my swollen ego and obvious folly. He deems my language ‘grandiose’ but gives no example. Writes that I am ‘not completely wrong’, presumably in my assessment of THE INSTRUCTIONS OF SHURUPPAK but no explanation there either. What part was wrong? I have never claimed to be alone in noticing the obvious mistake in the original translation. Yes, a fundamental mistake. Does he have a problem with that? He doesn’t say. I used the fact to demonstrate that it needed re-translating. Neither have I ever claimed to have discovered a secret language, only that I used an innovative method to re-translate the existing language.
I have no doubt that Jason hasn’t felt the need to read, much less to study THE STORY OF SUKURRU, my re-translation, which he dismisses as ‘a hypothetical reconstruction’. Neither does he feel the need to explain why he sees it that way or even what he means by that. A 280-line text comprising approximately 3,000 symbols, leaning on conventional source symbol meanings, resulting in a strikingly different and largely coherent storyline – I would need to be a genius if that result relied on thin/hot air as implied. As the translation (I insist on the word) took me over two years to do and the explanatory book another year, this nebulously worded dismissal with a wave of Jason’s regal hand is a tad annoying. But I’m in good company so hey ho! I also fully understand that I am once again nothing more than the bullet being used to fire at Graham Hancock. (see my response to an archaeologist at Gobekli Tepe: [grahamhancock.com]) so no worries concerning my perception of my own importance.
The word ‘claim’ used in the title is repeated to hammer home the absence of proof. Note that he doesn’t claim for himself to have read anything other than the article. But it did inspire him to visit my website for further ammunition. He gets as far as the middle of the first proverb there to make the point that my etymological links are fanciful nonsense, declaring after a peremptory glance:
“She looks for out-of-context similarities of sound and declares a connection.”
Consider the irony of that comment. A quick breakdown of the first two symbols: ME is the phonetic value (given in Sumerian dictionaries compiled by academics) to a symbol with the equally well-sourced meanings of ‘sorcerer’, ‘magician’ ‘divine properties’ and even ‘to be'. ZU in Sumerian dictionaries is symbol of knowledge and accepted by Assyriologists as designating a specialist, a doctor. ME-ZU, ‘knowledge of magic’…’knowledge of being’….’ME-to know?’ Thanks to multiple other straightforward examples of etymological links between Sumerian, Greek and other languages that are laid out throughout my translations (and must necessarily be taken into consideration with regard to my folly), I take it one step further and find there the origin of ‘meso-‘, the first two syllables of Mesopotamia. See the rest of the proverb – which can also be termed a riddle – look at the symbols and read my notes there to fully understand why it became ‘between the two (rivers)’. Or don’t. It’s a free world.
Jason, who clearly has no time for riddles, jumps on my reference to Hermes Trismegistus with obvious glee, writing:
“Hermes Trismegistus didn’t exist before the Greco-Egyptians invented him. “
Again, he has no problem assuring everyone of that. If he hasn’t read BEFORE BABEL, it’s unlikely he will know what is written there. But, apparently, he doesn’t need to. A well-documented 17th century assessment (Casaubon) of the various Hermetic texts served originally and continues to serve to refute the great antiquity of the name, i.e. Hermeticism goes no further back in time than the Hellenistic Greek period ca.300 BC. The esteemed Frances Yates* made the same case in 1964 and in the same authoritative terms. Look no further. Maximum confidence. No mention of other modern-day scholars who hold a different view, who cast fresh doubt on Casaubon’s analysis. Yet it’s unlikely that Jason Colavito is unaware of them. Is that why the name Casaubon doesn’t appear in his critique of me and my flights of Hermetic fancy? I made no absolute claims concerning the full corpus of Hermetic writings. My work concerns Hermes Trismegistus before 300 BC, and not what later sects and scholars made of him, not the manner in which his figure was obfuscated and ridiculed out of existence. I provide new evidence of that name within the Sumerian language. That’s the whole point – a fresh perspective directly from an even more ancient source. Turn the key. Or don’t…
Yes, however mind-boggling and crazy that may seem to Jason Colavito, the far more ancient Sumerian tablets, unknown in the 17th century AD, untranslated in the 20th, hold the truth concerning the Hermetic tradition and far more besides. I am not the self-designated keeper of the knowledge as implied – at least not voluntarily. Look more closely at the proverbs on my website for some completely free glimpses. Or not… Buy my books. Read THE STORY OF SUKURRU. Or not... I'm doing my best and that's all I ask everyone to believe without checking for themselves.
As for the SATOR square, another riddle, he writes somewhat awkwardly, “This claim is difficult to understand since the SATOR square isn’t fully understood”. Jason clearly has an uneasy relationship with other peoples’ wordplay. Refuting my claims without knowing what they are, mixing my references to the Knights Templar and others – obviously highlighted by me in BEFORE BABEL precisely because they are so well known and for good reasons – with other easy targets like his much-loved Ancient Aliens and the Twilight Zone are all extremely good examples of the ongoing manipulation of language mentioned in my article, linked here for those who forgot to read it:
It’s so easy to appear clever – particularly to oneself – in the process of muddying clear waters. And it’s sad that Jason has put to one side his talents – of which in-depth knowledge of ancient texts - to dedicate himself to viciously worded and ill-informed attacks on other peoples’ achievements. Please believe that I take no visceral pleasure in writing that.
*Frances A. Yates, GIORDANO BRUNO AND THE HERMETIC TRADITION, 1964, Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. Publishers.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 17-Feb-20 13:42 by MDaines.
|A Lesson in Language Manipulation||441||MDaines||17-Feb-20 13:35|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||57||thirdpal||17-Feb-20 15:52|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||61||MDaines||18-Feb-20 08:32|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||61||Glass Jigsaw||19-Feb-20 03:01|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||65||MDaines||19-Feb-20 09:38|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||82||Glass Jigsaw||21-Feb-20 01:21|
|Re: A Lesson in Language Manipulation||56||cladking||19-Feb-20 20:48|
|Academic credentials||59||drrayeye||19-Feb-20 23:53|