Good day to anons reading this,

This thread is going to be an attempt to build the Qmap by building the bridges and making the connections between different issues & threads, as well as finding out the truth about the REAL history of mankind. It’s all about digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs, digs…

Link to Bridges & Maps 3: https://8kun.top/qresearch/res/6687429.html

Archives of :

Bridges & Maps 1: http://archive.is/yzA4B

Bridges & Maps 2: https://archive.is/VbcWi

This is Thomas anon,

Good day to everyone reading this,

I’m trying this one more time. I was “sick” and “away”, when I came back, the 4th thread was gone. I’m going to repost what I have written before (making tiny changes or corrections) and continue from there.

I’ve declared in the past that I will TALK about “some” of what I KNOW WHEN THE TIME COMES; as in when the arrests start. That time has come.

This is GIANT puzzle. I’ve been holding some important pieces in my hand for decades now, without even realizing what they actually are or mean. I’ve managed to put some pieces together, while I’m still missing the connection between others. Hopefully, with the help of some anons, I might find those missing links and tie everything together.

For the work in this thread, I will appreciate every single assistance I will get, so let me send a “thank you” from the get go to everyone willing to help. As for the sources: for the written stuff, I will be mentioning them as I post, each according to where I am. But I want to attract the attention of anons that archeological artifacts, interviews with eye witnesses and maps can also be considered a source. It’s easy for anons to look at an artifact and notice the details, the message and what it is proving. So I’m not going to solely rely on written sources.

The digs are going to be a bit different in this thread; anything we find just won’t do. It’s going to be targeted digs, specific, as much as we can. In some parts, I’m still in the dark (sort of speak), so if I misinterpret or misunderstand, I will correct and/or apologize as I usually do.

I need to explain some things before I start. What is archeology? It’s a composition of 2 Greek words: Archeos means ancient, old; while Logos means word, or story. In other words archeology is the “story” of old things = the history of our past. A lot of people misinterpret archeology and what the work of an archeologist really consist of. A lot of people think we dig on the field and just go home. The truth is our work is composed of 4 very separate stages:

1 – The digging phase: it includes the actual digging, taking measurements of all sorts, filling the initial data, taking pictures etc. Loads of paper work, everything is meticulously noted.

2 – The reconstruction/restoration phase: here, we clean up everything dug out, manually and restore the broken artifacts (if needed) and we send some stuff to specialized labs depending on what we have. Second wave of paperwork.

3 –The report phase: Combining the info, comparing or searching in the archives and older database; which ends up in writing the final report = in other words digging in papers to put everything together.

4 – Museum phase: Now not all of our findings go into Museums, only the remarkable, rare or interesting pieces. Most of the finding goes into storage facilities.

So you see anons, our work doesn’t consist of simply digging. It’s a long process. And the time we spend on the field, is just like a tiny fraction of what we spend in labs, offices, libraries and archive rooms. We encounter loads and loads of “surprise bumps” while we work = from all types, shapes and forms. So we end up knowing a bit of everything, like being a carpenter, an architect, a chemist etc. We must have that little basic knowledge in loads of fields in order to get the work done without calling 911 every 10 min….if you know what I mean there. There is a misconception about what archeologists do, but there is also a misconception about archeology itself.

• Page 1 -

>>9207899

(Please read from the start)

In our modern day time, loads and loads of people believe strongly that whatever is written in books, mostly history books, us archeologist must find the artifact AS WRITTEN IN THE BOOK. Add to it MSM, Hollywood and recently the internet with social media, the truth is easily twisted, distorted to fit whatever narrative a few choses it to be. A lot of people nowadays want quick clicks and fast reading. Unfortunately that doesn’t work in archeology mostly if you are trying to find the truth about something specific. See in archeology, the initial data is always pure, raw….However, the interpretation of the data can be easily biased and manipulated. What people read on the net and from main stream history books are just that = it’s the analyzed version of the initial information found in archeology, which can be biased in the wrong hands. No one is willing to go and dig into a mountain of paper work just to get one sentence out. But it’s much easier and less time consuming to read what others interpret and write about the data.

To make it clearer for anons, I’m going to give you a few examples:

1 – Take a look at all sarcophaguses I’ve attached pictures of in this drop. At first glance, a lot of people immediately say, the first 2 are Pharaoh Egyptian and the last one is Greek. I’m certain millions of people walked by these sarcophaguses in museums without even knowing that they are actually Phoenician. And here comes the drama and the hysteria when I say that to people: “but, but….Phoenician doesn’t look like that! It looks Greek, Egyptian…. That’s impossible.”

No it isn’t? There is a very logical explanation to that. It was the trend back then ^_^ Tabnit and Eshmunazor were both kings of the Polis Sidon and back then, there was Egyptian art influence on the East coast of the Med sea. Those 2 kings had money and they bought those sarcophaguses. Tabnit wrote inscriptions in both hieroglyphics and Phoenician on the cover of his anthropoid sarcophagus, while Eshmunazor only wrote in Phoenician. Then, we have in a later period, where the Greek influence was dominating the East coast of the Med sea, a sarcophagus with Greek design on it. The explanation is super easy: I wear jeans most of the time, does that make me American? I adore eating Spaghetti Bolognese, does that make me Italian? I drive a Honda, does that make me Japanese? See what I mean by cultural influence and trends, anons? And if you’ve got money and you are king, you can buy yourself the best items that are provided by trade in the ancient world, even very exotic items.

And then, when you present this logical explanation, (((they))) and (((their))) minions come up with a supposedly counter argument saying: “if that’s the case, then the Phoenicians didn’t have any culture or arts of their own and they just copied others”. Really? That argument gets easily flushed when you point out that the biggest traders of the ancient world were the Phoenicians = they dominated trade for tens of centuries. Nowadays, if a car dealer buys a big lot of Japanese cars, can’t he keep one of them for himself and use it? And if he is wealthy, can’t he keep more than one for himself? Of course, he can. Back then was no different then what we do now. Imagine Potus not wearing a single one of the ties he produces with his name on it? Or never drink the wine the Trump family makes? Really? So since Potus is in the business, he cannot use his own products? It’s just the same for the biggest traders in the Med sea = can’t they follow the trend of back then and get buried in an Egyptian style sarcophagus? Says who? Oh! (((THEY))) said so. And since (((they))) own or control most media and printing, (((THEY))) get to write history as (((they))) want to interpret it themselves. Followed by a huge brainwashing of the public.

See how (((they))) hide the truth right in front of everyone’s nose?

• Page 2 –

>>9207918

(Please read from the start)

2 – I’m going to talk about a very specific nose, belonging to a very famous person as a second example: Cleopatra….everyone knows her right? And everyone remembers Sophia Loren, but mostly Elizabeth Taylor in her iconic role as Cleopatra. Terribly beautiful isn’t she? Such a wise and powerful woman and so romantic. That’s what (((they))) have made you believe through the means of Hollywood = their tool. The truth as archeologist knows it is totally different from the fiction we see in movies. Here again archeological artifacts are overlooked by the public and they choose the easy way into knowing history = through movies.

Ancient coins are evidence that Cleopatra VII Lagide is nothing like what Hollywood project her to be. Old coins are like a picture catalogue of ancient rulers. So take a look for yourself anons, and look closely to that nose. The truth is, among archeologists, Cleopatra VII is believed to be an ugly woman. The reason is because of the incest marriage in the royal Lagide family for centuries. If you take a look at the founder of the dynasty Ptolemy I Soter – note mostly detail of face, especially eyes, nose and chin, mouth) you will notice that most of his descendants had almost the exact same facial traits, mostly the boggled eyes. And since brothers married sisters to keep the blood pure, they perpetuated those physical traits all the way to Cleopatra VII. And yes, there were 6 other Lagide “queens” before her also named Cleopatra.

Some have attempted to make a digital reconstruction of Cleopatra VII’s true face. There are different results as anons can see, not totally identical, because the people doing the reconstruction have adopted different norms and each interpreted things their way. The point is, this is another method (((they))) used to distort history. The public doesn’t check the archeological artifact, but it’s easier, more comfy, for it to simply watch a movie = it’s like (((they))) cast a magic spell on the people using the movie and made everyone believe an alternative, false reality = welcome to the matrix anons.

I’m adding that in the documentary pointed out by Qteam = “Out of shadows”; they talked about this as well.

• Page 3 -

>>9207938

(Please read from the start)

3 – I’ve mentioned this before and since we are talking about coins being a photographic catalogue of past rulers = their portraits; let me give anons a third example of how (((they))) twisted and manipulated history by using the example of Tigran II the Great. Plutarch mentioned Tigran II in 3 of his “Parallel Lives” (in French: “La vie des hommes illustres”): In Sulla, in Lucullus and in Pompey. In Lucullus, (XXX & XXXI) he described the “reign of Tigran II as being tyranical”. If you read the whole of what he wrote about the Armenian king, anons will get the image of a very tyrannical, block minded, arrogant, power hungry and merciless Tigran II; even I could say a total illiterate barbarian.

Upon digging further, I found out that Tigran was considered by many as a wise ruler. He was very educated for his time, speaking fluently Armenian and Greek. He was patron of arts and his court welcomed musicians, painters, sculptors, poets, writers etc. At the fall of the Seleucid Empire, Antioch called for Tigran to assimilate the Polis and its territory to his kingdom; opening the gates of the city and celebrating him entering it. They even happily accepted to print his famous tetradrachms with the title of “Basileos Basileon Tigranou” = King of Kings Tigran. The reason given by Antioch was that Tigran was considered the only remaining king in the region which not only perpetuated the Hellenistic culture but also had an army powerful enough to defend them against any barbaric aggression including the one of the Romans.

So the Romans considered whatever that was not Roman to be tyrannical, arrogant and barbaric; while the Hellenistic culture considered whatever that was not Hellenistic as barbaric. But if you look closely to Plutarch’s texts, you will notice that he “attacked” Tigran’s personality, not mentioning his accomplishments (unless they are bad ones) or the cultural nest which his court was. In other words Plutarch did his best to paint the Armenian king in a negative way. If anons compare, it’s the exact and same method used by nowadays MSM to attack Potus and paint a negative image of him. Same type, exactly the same. If I wanted to describe Plutarch bias, I would say he was the Roman CNN – if you know what I mean there.

But this doesn’t mean Plutarch’s text should be thrown away and disregarded. In fact, there is one section in his description of Tigran that matches the truth: it’s when he described Tigran’s clothing and crown. How do I know this? Remember how I keep on saying that the text must match the archeological artifact and not the artifact must match the text? The answer was provided by Tigran’s coins, his famous tetradrachms. So only in this section of his writings about Tigran did Plutarch say the truth because what he wrote is very very close to what we see on those famous tetradrachms. That section matches the archeological artifact. So you see anons, no matter how much Plutarch slandered Tigran and called him stuff, even invented stuff or omitted them, there is a small fraction in his text that was truthful. This is why we got to always handle the ancient texts very carefully, very.

4 – My last example is something that I’ve experienced myself in one of my digs. An acquaintance of mine needed an extra set of digging hands to help him out at a small site from the Middle Ages. Not my era but a digger is a digger in archeology. So I agreed to it, and of course the experts handled the artifacts that came out, I just helped them get them out of the soil. So I was digging a medieval site and I had the surprise of my life time: right there, next to the skeleton I was digging out, very close to it, was a soda can.

A soda can with the design from the late XX century, laid so close to the skeleton I was digging. My first reaction was = somebody was pulling a prank on me. I asked everyone around but everyone was as much as surprised as I was. So it was not a prank. We decided to take a closer look at this soda can: it looked like it was smashed on one side while it had this kinda of circular hole in it. We couldn’t figure out what it’s all about. There was no explanation, no logical explanation onto how this “modern” day soda can managed to get into the medieval layer which was many centuries ago. And I can assure everyone, no one pulled a prank, it was not the wind blowing it since the design on the can was from late XX century, and it was surely not the aliens who put it there. So how did it get there?

• Page 4 -

>>9207950

(Please read from the start)

To make a long story short, after many, many months of researching, digging and asking people around, we met the old gardener of the site and he told us that decades ago (date corresponding to the design on the soda can) a fast growing type of tree was planted there. A few years before he retired, that tree was cut down and uprooted because it “got sick”. After sending the soda can to the lab for further examination, we discovered miniscule shreds of wood still stuck around that hole in the can; which matched the type of trees the old gardener told us about. So you see anons, it was not an alien nor hocus pocus that got that modern day can all the way down to the medieval layer. It was someone, decades ago, who threw that soda can next to a fast growing tree. The roots of that tree somehow got a hold of the can and dragged it downwards, even piercing it through, getting it all the way down to the medieval layer.

I hope anons will take note of what I just said, mostly the examples I’ve just given, they will help you understand how it works.

Another important factor to take into consideration is CONTEXT: when we are digging a site or if we find an artifact, context is super important. And in this dig, context will play a role.

Chronology = the Time line… now that turned out to be an impossible task for me this far. It’s one of my biggest causes for headaches. I can put some stuff in a sequel, put them in a line one after the other, but it’s almost impossible to put a date on them. So if I’m going to give/ mention a date, it will be the one from the main stream history books. Of course, chronology should be revised but with what I have right now, it’s not doable. My first concern is how to measure historical chronology. By that I mean is in main stream history, we have a very important marker = birth of Christ. So we used the B.C. and A.D. to fix the date either before or after the birth of Christ. But with what I have, the problem of pin pointing a chronological marker has surfaced. Anons will understand what I’m talking about when we get to it.

In this thread, I will MAINLY be posting about 3 subjects that are interlinked, intertwined together. I call them: 1 – After the Flood. – 2 – Atlantis. – 3 – Origins.

But I want to put some boundaries: What I’m going to say is most probably going to displease a lot of anons whom are hard core believers in these subjects = Green or Grey Aliens, feline or reptile Aliens, Anunnaki, Book of Enoch, Nephilim, Flat Earth. I don’t believe in them one bit, I won’t talk about them, I won’t answer anything about them. I’ve been lurking, listening and reading for a full year now and I have not been convinced so far by any of these. The answers or explanations given are not enough for me and this type of information kept me hungry.

Tartaria, Lemuria and Antarctica, I might mention them in a shallow way, but I rather put those aside for now.

• Page 5 -

>>9207955

(Please read from the start)

I’m very interested in GIANTS and ELONGATED SKULLS. I think it goes straight into a section of the puzzle. But as I just said, no Nephilim, so when I will be talking about giants, it will be mostly about graves, skeletons and sculptures.

In order to understand me better, please anons, go grab a coin; any coin would do. Then take a good long look at that coin. Turn it around and inspect closely every inch of it. If I asked anons how many sides does a coin have; what would your reply be? I bet most if not all would tell me two sides (heads and tails); while I would reply three side = heads, tails and the edge.

We always have 2 sides of things in life and that includes History: we had the main stream history and just on its opposite side, we had the alternative history. But what if both are wrong and both are right? What if neither got it right? What if each got a fragment of the truth? What if the truth was stuck on the line, somewhere, where both sides meet? What if there was a third option?

This is where I will be walking. I will be walking on that narrow edge of the coin, where the heads and the tails meet. And if you look closely, there are ridges on most coin edges = it’s going to be a bumpy ride.

I’m not “satisfied” with the main stream history, like when they tell us that the Sumerians “suddenly appeared out of nowhere”. That doesn’t make any sense? And I’m not satisfied in what the alternative history is telling us = Aliens = the anunnaki created the Sumerians. It doesn’t stick with me. What if, there was a third option? What if there was a very logical explanation? But it was kept away from us in order to hide a much bigger truth.

With everything said and done, I’m going to ask anon, whoever is truly interested in knowing the truth, to take a bit of your time and read about Armenia’s geography - precisely: the geographical location, the relief = physical geography, the hydrology, the meteorology, the fauna, the flora, agriculture, domesticated animals and the minerals coming out of the earth. In order to understand what I’m going to talk about, you got to get acquainted about those first anons.

• Page 6 -

>>9207964

(Please read from the start)

Let me tell anons how it all started: I was working back then in a research place, as a team member and we had this big research. It took us 7 full years to accomplish it. For obvious reasons I’m not going to mention the subject of our research, but I want to point out that in order to get the information needed for that specific subject of ours, we had to gather secondary information. That secondary information consisted of two points: 1 – finding ALL the trade (traveling) routes leading to the East Coast of the Med Sea. 2 – What type of merchandise was used in trade. We also had a specific time frame to work under = from 2000 B.C. all the way to the end of Augustus’ reign. HUGE isn’t it? But just like I said, this was only secondary information which will lead us to our main research subject, back then.

The geographic area to cover was as huge as the time frame. So we decided to divide the work between us and each one of us was in charge of one “geographic location” to gather the required information from. It turned out Armenia was assigned to me. A place, I know almost nothing about apart hearing of the genocide. So I was as clueless as clueless can be about Armenia.

I had to start somewhere, right? And what better way to get acquainted with Armenia than to get to know its geography (=context). I want to point out to anons, that geography is ALWAYS HONEST, it cannot LIE or be BIASED. It’s a physical object, or should I say a force of nature that cannot be changed: like we have a mountain here, a river there, a valley next to a mountain which is this high and this wide etc. No matter how you try to twist it, the physical geography of a place remains the same for everyone to see.

I read a lot of modern books about Armenia’s geography. Of course I used maps, saw videos and pictures of it as well, to confirm what was written. I even read from ancient sources (Strabo, Geography, mostly XI) and compared what they said to modern day writing to see if there were any type of changes, mostly in the flora and fauna.

There are a few important things that popped out about Armenia’s geography that anons should take note of:

Its geographical location on a HIGH plateau = Armenia is considered a HIGHLAND. It’s like a huge maze of interlocked or zigzagging mountains, making it a NATURAL fortress. No matter what the era, century or rule was, 90 % of Armenia’s ancient capitals were located in what is called as “Armenia’s heart”, including nowadays capital Yerevan (which apparently means Victoria). I was surprised to see how easy it is to locate Armenia on any map (just like the boot shape of Italy) because of “Armenia’s heart” = the 3 Armenian lakes with the names of Van, Sevan and Urmia consist of the 3 angles of a triangle, once connected like what I did on this map, anons will have a visual of Armenia HEART. Those 3 lakes along with Erzurum and Ararat were from the beginning of times part of Armenia; they were stripped away from it by the Bloodlines at the beginning of the XXth century….but that is a story for another time.

Another specific trait in Armenia’s geography is that all through history, heart land Armenia = the plateau, never had any direct access to any sea. And then comes the weather, mostly the terrible Armenian winter. There isn’t anyone writing about it who didn’t describe it as a harsh winter, which is due to the altitude of the plateau. This terrible Armenian winter was in a strange way like a protector, shielding the plateau many months per year from invading armies.

• Page 7 -

>>9207982

(Please read from the start)

Strabo, reported something about the winter: apparently travels of the Armenian Plateau during winter used very long sticks, tube like sticks. These specific sticks had a double function: 1 – In case of an avalanche occurring and they were buried, those sticks would be used as tube to breath. 2 – Those sticks would also pin point the location if they got buried in an avalanche.

Even Xenophon, in his Anabasis (IV), reported how harsh and terrible Armenia’s winter is. He even reported that the locals used, during winter, to wrap their horse’s feet with animal skins so they won’t sink into the snow. As if this was not enough, the plateau was also exposed to violent winds.

After I got acquainted to the “WHERE” my research was going to take place, it was time to find out about the “WHAT” and the “HOW”.

One of my early findings was the inscription of Behistun, located in nowadays Iran. Let me say from the get go: FOR NOW, I’m not going to comment on the relief. I’m ONLY going to talk about the TEXT.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behistun_Inscription

“The Behistun Inscription (also Bisotun, Bistun or Bisutun; Persian: ‎, Old Persian: Bagastana, meaning "the place of god") is a multilingual inscription and large rock relief on a cliff at Mount Behistun in the Kermanshah Province of Iran, near the city of Kermanshah in western Iran, established by Darius the Great (r. 522–486 BC). It was crucial to the decipherment of cuneiform script as the inscription includes three versions of the same text, written in three different cuneiform script languages: Old Persian, Elamite, and Babylonian (a variety of Akkadian). The inscription is to cuneiform what the Rosetta Stone is to Egyptian hieroglyphs: the document most crucial in the decipherment of a previously lost script.

Authored by Darius the Great sometime between his coronation as king of the Persian Empire in the summer of 522 BC and his death in autumn of 486 BC, the inscription begins with a brief autobiography of Darius, including his ancestry and lineage. Later in the inscription, Darius provides a lengthy sequence of events following the deaths of Cyrus the Great and Cambyses II in which he fought nineteen battles in a period of one year (ending in December 521 BC) to put down multiple rebellions throughout the Persian Empire. The inscription states in detail that the rebellions, which had resulted from the deaths of Cyrus the Great and his son Cambyses II, were orchestrated by several impostors and their co-conspirators in various cities throughout the empire, each of whom falsely proclaimed kinghood during the upheaval following Cyrus's death.

Darius the Great proclaimed himself victorious in all battles during the period of upheaval, attributing his success to the "grace of Ahura Mazda".

The inscription is approximately 15 m (49 ft) high by 25 m (82 ft) wide and 100 m (330 ft) up a limestone cliff from an ancient road connecting the capitals of Babylonia and Media (Babylon and Ecbatana, respectively). The Old Persian text contains 414 lines in five columns; the Elamite text includes 593 lines in eight columns, and the Babylonian text is in 112 lines. The inscription was illustrated by a life-sized bas-relief of Darius I, the Great, holding a bow as a sign of kingship, with his left foot on the chest of a figure lying on his back before him. The supine figure is reputed to be the pretender Gaumata. Darius is attended to the left by two servants, and nine one-meter figures stand to the right, with hands tied and rope around their necks, representing conquered peoples. A Faravahar floats above, giving its blessing to the king. One figure appears to have been added after the others were completed, as was Darius's beard, which is a separate block of stone attached with iron pins and lead.”

• Page 8 –

>>9207998

(Please read from the start)

A translated section from the inscription:

“Darius also lists the territories under his rule:

King Darius says: These are the countries which are subject unto me, and by the grace of Ahuramazda I became king of them: Persia [Pârsa], Elam [Ûvja], Babylonia [Bâbiruš], Assyria [Athurâ], Arabia [Arabâya], Egypt [Mudrâya], the countries by the Sea [Tyaiy Drayahyâ], Lydia [Sparda], the Greeks [Yauna (Ionia)], Media [Mâda], Armenia [Armina], Cappadocia [Katpatuka], Parthia [Parthava], Drangiana [Zraka], Aria [Haraiva], Chorasmia [Uvârazmîy], Bactria [Bâxtriš], Sogdia [Suguda], Gandhara [Gadâra], Scythia [Saka], Sattagydia [Thataguš], Arachosia [Harauvatiš] and Maka [Maka]; twenty-three lands in all.”

And there is also this second source, to read carefully because of Vanderbilt University (this indirectly means cabal was trying to decipher the text – (((they))) were interested in it): https://www.ancient.eu/Behistun_Inscription/

It’s important to note “the countries by the Sea” = this refers to the Phoenician City-States, like Byblos, Tyr, Sidon, etc. But we will leave this for some other time. And of course, there is Armenia. Why is this important or relevant to my research? Because it is providing subtle information beyond the obvious ones: the Armenian Satrap couldn’t leave the territory for LONG. All of the Satraps were supposed to pay tribute to the Medes then the Persians. With the “political” instability and mostly the rebellion of some of the Satraps, it’s obvious the Armenian Satrap couldn’t leave for a very long period his Satrapy to travel all the way to Persia to pay the tribute.A subtle information which was backed up by the harsh and terrible winter of Armenia: they had a very narrow time window in which they could travel from and back Armenia without being trapped by the weather. So in an indirect way the Inscription of Behistun provided me with 2 clues:

1 – The means of travel shouldn’t consume too much time, it should be a “quick” method of traveling all of this distance, and this includes all types of people traveling, from the Satrap to traders.

2 – Armenia had “precious” merchandise (thought after) which was paid as tribute to the Achaemenid kings.

>>9208004

(Please read from the start)

This lead me to check what was THAT tribute and it lead me straight to Apadana East Stairs’ relief.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apadana

“Apadana […] is a large hypostyle hall, best said the great audience hall and portico at Persepolis and the palace of Susa. The Persepolis Apadana belongs to the oldest building phase of the city of Persepolis, the first half of the 6th century BC, as part of the original design by Darius the Great. Its construction completed by Xerxes I. Modern scholarship "demonstrates the metaphorical nature of the Apadana reliefs as idealised social orders".

“The Apadana was the largest building on the Terrace at Persepolis and was excavated by the German archaeologist Ernst Herzfeld and his assistant Friedrich Krefter, and Erich Schmidt, between 1931 and 1939. Important material relevant to the excavations are today housed in the archives of the Freer Gallery of Art in Washington, DC.

It was most likely the main hall of the kings. The columns reached 20m high and had complex capitals in the shape of bulls or lions. Here, the great king received the tribute from all the nations in the Achaemenid Empire, and gave presents in return.

Access to the hall is given by two monumental stairways, on the north and on the east. These are decorated by reliefs, showing delegates of the 23 subject nations of the Persian Empire paying tribute to Darius I, who is represented seated centrally. The various delegates are shown in great detail, giving insight into the costume and equipment of the various peoples of Persia in the 5th century BC. There are inscriptions in Old Persian and Elamite.”

On the East side of the Apadana staircase the Armenian delegation is represented. And what they paid as tribute was: HORSES and WINE. This archeological finding was supported by what was written in ancient sources (remember how I always say that the written source must fit the artifact and not the other way around?).

In his Cyropaedia (III), Xenophon mentions a dispute between the locals in Armenia which was resolved by King Cyrus. When reading this, many domesticated animals were mentioned, including the Armenian horse.

But the best confirmation came from Strabo, Geography (XI) who stated that Armenia had to pay as tribute of 20 thousand foals, that is 20 000 FOALS, PER YEAR to the Achaemenid king; for the Mithra festival held on the 25th of December each year. Ring a bell anyone? Please take NOTE for later.

Xenophon in his Anabasis (IV) supports Strabo’s words and adds that these foals were destined to the cult of the SUN. After extensive reading, I found out it was widely known through the ages and all the way up to modern times that Armenia was the “Land of horses”. It was famous for it.

Upon further digging, I found out that the prophet Ezekiel said in his lament of Tyr (XXVII,14) : “14The men of Beth-togarmah exchanged horses, war horses, and mules for your wares.” He says that Togarmah comes from the “extreme north”; combining this information with Armenia being known as the land of horses, we can say that “Beth Togarmah ( = house of Togarma) is a reference to Armenia. I will explain this further later on.

We shouldn’t forget the WINE we saw in the relief of Apadana, which I considered as the second Armenian merchandise. I did a lot of reading anons, and I found out that during the centuries the Armenian merchandise traded varied a bit depending on the age and time, but there were 3 MAJOR items which turned out to be consistent = the Armenian horses as I’ve just given an example of, the Armenian wine and animal skin and/or furs. These turned out to be the most famous, consistent Armenian trade items during the ages. And yes, they reached the shores of the East Med Sea. So I finally nailed the WHAT = the Armenian merchandise that reached the coast = HORSES, WINE & ANIMAL SKINS.

Anons, you will understand me more and more as I progress and you will understand why I’m leaving secondary research and details aside for now and going straight ahead to the Main GOAL.

• Page 10 -

>>9208077

(Please read from the start)

Since I knew the WHERE and the WHAT it was time to find out the HOW; how did they travel from the high plateau to the East coast of the Med Sea?

When trade is concerned, there are usually 3 ways of travel:

1 – By Air.

2 – By Land.

3 – By Water.

1 – Well, this one was quick and easy to solve: there were no flying machinery back then, so Air travel didn’t occur. This method of travel is easily eliminated.

2 – At first glance traveling by land is doable; all the travelers had to do is to follow the sun (during the day) and the stars (during the night) for directions. But upon looking further into this, I found out it’s not a favorable way of travel, despite the fact that it can be done. There were many disadvantages:

2A- The first disadvantage is the relief of Armenia itself; all of those mountains and valleys interlocked, creating a big maze as I’ve stated before. So instead of going through a straight walking line, the travelers will have to zigzag a lot, making the walking distance longer, more tiresome, and more time consuming – remember the Armenian satrap couldn’t leave his Satrapy for a long period of time because of revolt possibility. Apart that, anons should remember that BACK THEN, there were no paved road, no tarmac, no street lights….it was all mountain trails and dirt roads. Since Armenia is a mountainous country, we should add to the equation the terrain slides and soil movement, mostly after the snow melts. The plateau is volcanic in nature, so we shouldn’t rule out earthquakes as well.

2B- The second disadvantage is the weather. As stated before, the long, terrible and harsh Armenian winter narrows down the time window to travel (remember the tube like sticks mentioned in previous drop). But that was not the only problem the weather caused. Even during the “good season”, the plateau suffered from extreme temperatures during day and during night = freezing cold night and suffocating day heat with no humidity at all. And as mentioned before, there were violent gushes of wind. So even if it wasn’t winter, anons shouldn’t underestimate the harshness of the Armenian weather.

2C- The third disadvantage was the Armenian fauna; by that I mean the wild life. The Armenian plateau was the home of a varied and huge collection of wild life animals; from: bears, ducks, tigers, foxes, boars, owls, Lynx and other mountain cats, deer, eagles and wolves. There were also many poisonous types of snakes, scorpions and other little creepy creatures crawling everywhere. This is why the plateau was renowned for centuries as being a hunting destination for all royals from Mesopotamia and Persia. And this also explains the abundance of animal skins and furs for them to use in trade. Up till this day, Armenia has a skin/fur market.

• Page 11 –

>>9208086

(Please read from the start)

2D – The forth disadvantage is actually the flora; back then, Armenia was covered in many, many forests = home of the wild animals. Anons should know that a caravan walking through a forest infested with wild animals and camp there at night is not a very smart thing to do, mostly if you are transporting a big number of livestock, like the foals. Not to forget the potential risk of wild fires in the warm season.

2E – The fifth disadvantage was the “type” of merchandise itself. Well, it’s easy to transport the animal skins, all you have to do is to stack them one on top of the other on the back of a mule or horse and that would be it. The problem lies with the foals and the wine.

Horses, mostly foals, are not as easy to transport as anons think. Even the most trained horse can easily be frightened by lightning or by the howling of wolves, so imagine how young horses like the foals would react. Now just reread all the disadvantages I’ve just stated above and try to imagine a caravan of a 100 horses going through BY FOOT, a dense forest, or walking a very long distance under the extreme swinging temperatures, the territory traveled is infested with all sorts of wild animals and there are all kinds of unexpected “surprises” like earthquakes and terrain slides. And then ask yourself, how many of those 100 horses will survive and arrive to their final destination either if it was Persia or the East coast of the Med Sea. I say very few. Remember what Strabo said? He said the Armenians used to pay a tribute of 20 000 foals to the Persians….. So imagine transporting THAT HUGE NUMBER of foals in such disadvantages, not forgetting that foals are more susceptible to perish under these “natural” disadvantages than adult horses.

Same problem encountered with the Armenian wine. Back then to transport wine for trade, they used CLAY amphorae. When I say Amphora I don’t mean the small type like the one we saw on the relief in Apadana of the Armenian delegation. There are many, many shapes and sizes of Amphora, but the ones used to transport wine, oil and grain were big…. I mean big enough to be able to carry a rather big quantity of the product, but small enough for people to be able to lift them as well. It’s very easy to install one amphora on each side of horse or mule but we come back again to the “natural” disadvantages scaring the animal, making it panic and run, which could end up with the CLAY amphora being broken and/or the wine stirred. How many amphorae will make it to destination without breaking it or spoiling the wine? I’m not a wine expert, but I’ve heard wine shouldn’t be stirred much. Anyone in the domain would like to comment about this and enlighten me a bit more about wine?

So you see anons, travel by land is doable, but it has many, many disadvantages. This option, way of travel, made me wince. I was not comfortable with it. Too many holes to plug, sort of speak = risk factor is way too high. And we shouldn’t forget the travelers and traders had a narrow time window to travel within, so they had to “get out” and then “get in” as fast as possible. Travel by land takes too much time and had too many hurdles to tackle.

• Page 12-

>>9208109

(Please read from the start)

I still have to check the third way of travel = Water.

3- This method of travel can be divided into 2 subgroups as well:

3A- Travel by sea was not possible from the Armenian plateau since it had no direct access to any sea. Some may argue that they could have traveled to the shores of the Black Sea and then taken sail from there, passed the Bosporus & Dardanelles straits, go through the Aegean Sea then head straight to the East Coast of the Med Sea. Well, that is doable, it’s possible, but the travelers must pass the Pontic mountain range first in order to reach the shores of the Black Sea….Here again, we face the same disadvantages I mentioned when I talked about travel by Land. So this also made me wince.

3B- The remaining way of travel to check upon is FLUVIAL. Armenia has many rivers, the most famous 3 are the Araxes, the Tigris and the Euphrates. The Araxes is not going in the direction of the East Coast of the Med Sea (=westward); as a matter of fact, it’s flowing in the opposite direction (= eastward). This one was quickly eliminated.

The Tigris River is not practical for downstream navigation because of its tumultuous “course” and mostly the violence of its current. From the beginning of times all the way up to our modern times, the Tigris is famous for the speed of its current, making it very difficult to steer boats. Thus it’s gotten its name (as some believe) from the Medes, meaning = ARROW. We got to add to it the risk of drowning = the violent current easily drags away anyone or anything – even in modern day times. I believe anons should remember this disaster from last year.

https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/iraq-declares-national-mourning-after-94-die-in-ferry-sinking-25157

My condolences.

So it’s not “practical”, nor “safe” to transport horses or wine amphorae in such tumultuous waters. The risk factor is high, even if you are a tough guy whom can handle the navigation on the Tigris River.

This leaves me with the Euphrates; which was a navigable river, as attested in many old and modern sources. It is important to note that the Euphrates River, just like its companion the Tigris River, has its sources located in the Armenian plateau – the main tributary is located at west base of Mount Ararat (= the Murat Su), which is later on joined by a second tributary (= the Kara Su) in the vicinity of Erzurum.

• Page 13 –

>>9208122

(Please read from the start)

Upon studying the map and the path of the Euphrates, I found 2 possible routes that can lead the travelers from the River to the East coast of the Med Sea. But I also found out 2 other routes that lead to some interesting places. I will be talking about all 4 of them right now:

A – Routes from the Euphrates leading to the East Coast of the Med Sea:

1 - When we look at any map, we can see the Euphrates making an “elbow” shape turn just after entering Syria, on the latitude of Aleppo. This is the closest that any traveler from the Plateau can get to the coast via the Euphrates. It’s so close to Aleppo that any traveler, including trade caravans can reach the city easily. Anons shouldn’t forget that Aleppo is one of the oldest cities in the world and a trade center as old as the city. Once the Armenian traders reached Aleppo, it’s so easy to reach the East Coast of the Med Sea and go all the way down to every port on the coastline. See Euphrates Map 1.

2 - If the travelers choose to continue their journey downstream river, they can reach the latitude of Bagdad, which was close to the ancient “Silk Road” = the famous caravan road that came all the way from China & India, to sell their goods to the East Coast of the Med Sea. Once in Bagdad, it won’t be much of a hassle for the Armenian traders to join the caravans departing from Bagdad to Damascus (or any other city) and from Damascus to any port city-state. See Euphrates Map 2.

Before I move onto the next point, I want to make a couple of things clear.

First, I randomly choose Bagdad and Damascus in my example just now. The Silk Road itinerary did change during history; Bagdad and Damascus are the closes to the middle line between the maximum northern itinerary and the maximum southern itinerary….They are more or less like the middle line, that’s why I picked them up for my example. If anons want to dig about it, this is one heck of a tunnel to dive into.

Secondly, depending on the era, the Silk Road was considered more or less a “secured” road to travel on. The disadvantages I’ve talked about previously can be reduced to 4 : the extreme temperatures, mostly the difference between the day and night. The sand storm which did occur from time to time. The poisonous animals, from snakes to scorpions. And lastly, occasional thieves. But this “Silk Road” was a big source of revenue or a big profit maker for the rulers of the land, no matter how the border lines changed. So most of the time, there were posts or famous camping sites near wells or oasis to station/shelter at during a sand storm; or simply take a rest and replenish water supplies. As for the thieves, since this was lucrative to the rulers (most of the time), they thought of sending troops to patrol the area where the caravans crossed. Not all did that, but some did. Besides, the traders in such caravans were veterans and tough men in order to travel all of this distance and withstand natural and human dangers. They were well equipped.

B - Routes that lead to some interesting places:

Even though this was not included as my research goal, I couldn’t help but look a bit into it back then because of what they represent:

1 – Instead of going westward after reaching Bagdad, the travelers could have turned eastwards and headed straight into Persia. At least, now I know how those 20 000 foals, mentioned by Strabo got there for the Mithra Festival. And, back then, I didn’t check if there were any other itineraries heading out from the Armenian plateau towards Persia (maybe via the Caspian sea) since it was not my research objective; but it’s worth looking at for those who are interested in this type of research. See Euphrates Map 3.

• Page 14 –

>>9208140

(Please read from the start)

2 – There is also this forth itinerary that caught my attention and interest: the Armenian caravan could have easily gone south, south-east and reached… when I realized WHERE IT REACHED. I thought to myself: “could it be? Is it possible?” I wonder if those of you whom are veterans in history and those who have dug in the alternative history realized just now what I have realized back then? Take note of this anons, I will get back to this point soon. See Euphrates Map 4.

Each reader has his own opinion, but for me, everything is pointing that the Armenian traders which came down from the plateau via the Euphrates must have taken, most probably, the first itinerary to reach the coastline the fastest way – See Euphrates Map 1 – and make it back to the Armenian Highlands fast, before winter settled in. After determining the 2 itineraries from the Euphrates to the East Coast of the Med Sea (Euphrates Maps 1 & 2), all I had to research is the type of vessel (boats in our case here) used to navigate on the Euphrates from the Armenian plateau.

My initial thoughts were that I would find something like a raft, big and strong enough to carry the weight of the travelers and the merchandise without capsizing. But I ran into something totally different.

I found what I was looking for in something called Kuphar, Quffa or Guffa. Plenty of photographic evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuphar

“A kuphar (also transliterated kufa, kuffah, quffa, quffah, etc.[1]) is a type of coracle or round boat traditionally used on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in ancient and modern Mesopotamia. Its circular shape means that it does not sail well against the current, as it tends to spin, but makes it safe, sturdy and easy to construct. A kuphar is propelled by rowing or poling.”

“The word "kuphar" is derived from the Arabic word quffa (), meaning a basket woven from reeds and leaves. The boat visually resembles a basket and is used for a similar purpose: transporting fruits, vegetables, and other goods.[4] The Arabic word in turn originated from the Akkadian word quppu, meaning basket.”

>> Notice Akkadian.

• Page 15 –

>>9208171

(Please read from the start)

“Reliefs depicting kuphars have been found in Assyrian ruins dating to the reigns of Kings Ashurnasirpal II (883 to 859 BCE), Sennacherib (705 to 681 BCE), and Ashurbanipal (668 to 627 BCE), who reigned during the 9th, 8th, and 7th centuries BCE, respectively.[2]:130 A translation of a tablet found by an amateur historian places the kuphar's origin even further in the past, in the Old Babylonian period (c.1830–1531 BCE), although this translation is disputed.[5]

But that which surprises me most in the land, after the city itself, I will now proceed to mention. The boats which come down the river to Babylon are circular, and made of skins. The frames, which are of willow, are cut in the country of the Armenians above Assyria, and on these, which serve for hulls, a covering of skins is stretched outside, and thus the boats are made, without either stem or stern, quite round like a shield. They are then entirely filled with straw, and their cargo is put on board, after which they are suffered to float down the stream. Their chief freight is wine, stored in casks made of the wood of the palm-tree. They are managed by two men who stand upright in them, each plying an oar, one pulling and the other pushing. The boats are of various sizes, some larger, some smaller; the biggest reach as high as five thousand talents' burthen. Each vessel has a live ass on board; those of larger size have more than one. When they reach Babylon, the cargo is landed and offered for sale; after which the men break up their boats, sell the straw and the frames, and loading their asses with the skins, set off on their way back to Armenia. The current is too strong to allow a boat to return upstream, for which reason they make their boats of skins rather than wood. On their return to Armenia they build fresh boats for the next voyage.

— Herodotus

Five thousand Greek talents would be 143 tons (130 tonnes). This is likely an exaggeration, although carvings of large kuphars carrying cut stones have been found in Assyrian ruins. These large kuphars were propelled by four rowers and relied partially on inflated hide sacks attached port and starboard to stay afloat.[7] More reliable and recent analyses have determined that the largest ancient kuphar measured 18 feet (5.5 m) in diameter and could transport up to 16 tons.[8]:86

There were two major forms of construction used — hides stretched over a framework, as described by Herodotus, and woven bundles of reeds or basketry, waterproofed with bitumen. Boats of this sort were still used in modern times, being described by British ethnographer James Hornell in The Coracles of the Tigris and Euphrates (1938).”

“A Babylonian cuneiform tablet on display at the British Museum suggests that Noah's Ark may have been a large kuphar.[10] This tablet was translated by professor Irving Finkel and found to contain an ancient flood narrative that may have inspired the story of Noah's Ark.[11] Following his translation, professor Finkel organized the construction of a large vessel of this kind, though he claimed that his 35 tonne ship was a scaled-down version of the full-sized ark.[12] Finkel attempted to launch his "ark" in Kerala, India, in 2014, but was unsuccessful. He attributed the failed launch of his double-decker vessel to the low quality of bitumen available in the area.[13][12]

The tablet describes the flood myth of Atrahasis, a Babylonian hero who built an ark to shelter life from a flood of a divine origin that is thought to have started as a river flood.[12] This ark was, according to the legend described on the tablet, a large kuphar, with either one or two decks, and a total deck area of 14,400 cubits2 (3600 m2). Noah's Ark is traditionally described as having a similar deck plan and a nearly identical deck area of 15,000 cubits2 (a difference of 4%). This has led Finkel to conclude that "the iconic story of the Flood, Noah, and the Ark as we know it today certainly originated in the landscape of ancient Mesopotamia, modern Iraq."[14][12]

Some evidence has been found of Neo-Assyrian legends depicting infants being cast adrift in kuphars on the river, similar to how baby Moses was cast adrift in a basket in the Book of Exodus.[15] This has led some scholars to conclude that the basket that Moses was set adrift in on the Nile may have in fact been a kuphar.”

• Page 16 –

>>9208182

(Please read from the start)

“Kuphars remained in widespread use as water taxis, lighters, fishing boats, and ferries in early 20th century Iraq, especially around Baghdad. These vessels are typically 4.5–10 feet (1.4–3 meters) wide at the opening and have drafts of 2.5–4 feet (0.8–1.2 meters) and freeboards of 6–8 inches (15–20 cm) fully loaded. They typically transport four to five people although they can carry up to 20. Larger kuphars can transport four to five tons, equivalent to three horses, several people, and other assorted cargo.[2]:132 The largest one measured in the 20th century had an opening 16.4 feet (5.0 m) in diameter, although due to the tumblehome nature of the kuphar's hull, its diameter overall was 18 feet (5.5 m).”

“Kuphar use declined following the development of the automobile and the widespread construction of roads and bridges across modern Iraq. However, they could still be seen around Iraq until the 1970s.[2]:130 Modern kuphars are made of woven bundles of reeds waterproofed with bitumen, as in ancient times.[3] James Hornell described them thus:[3]:153

…the craft likened in form to the Tibetan food-bowl—perfectly circular in plan, nearly flat bottomed, and with convexly curved sides that tumble-home to join the stout cylindrical gunwale bounding the mouth, which is several inches less in diameter than the width at mid height. In construction a quffa is just a huge lidless basket, strengthened within by innumerable ribs radiating from around the centre of the floor. The type of basketry employed is of that widely distributed kind termed coiled basketry.

— James Hornell

Tennyson referenced the boats in his 1827 poem Persia,

On fair Diarbeck's land of spice,

Adiabene's plains of rice,

Where down th' Euphrates, swift and strong,

The shield-like kuphars bound along;

— Alfred, Lord Tennyson”

“The kuphar's similarity to other circular boats has been noted by many authors.[8][16] This is not a coincidence: Hornell, Marie-Christine De Graeve, and other ethnographers and anthropologists believe that the kuphar is the common ancestor of the coracles that are widely used across Eurasia, particularly in the British Isles and South and Southeast Asia.[2][8]:85-9 However, the similar Irish currach was independently developed by the ancient Celts.”

Well anons, this time around, I’m going to fire multiple canons into what Wikipedia wrote about the Kuphar. I didn’t write that long introduction to anons explaining what is Archaeology and what Archeologists do out for nothing. I did it for such moments and to show anons how (((THEY))) twist and change history in order to HIDE a secret; an ancient SECRET.

• Page 17 –

>>9208198

(Please read from the start)

Next I’m going to dismantle what the MAIN STREAM HISTORY has written about it and show anons how (((THEY))) twisted history in order to hide a SECRET. Recently, this secret, lead me to another secret, a big secret, which in turn, lead me to a bigger secret, so on, and then I ended up with the biggest secret.

Do anons know the Matryoshka doll? Well, this turned out to be one, but in reverse, instead of going from the big doll to the smallest one, I started with the smallest to end up with the biggest. Anons will understand me more as I go down this rabbit hole.

The wikipedia page about the Kuphar is a field covered with land mines. (((They))) don’t want us to cross this field and find out what’s on the other side of it. So let me tackle this by starting to say that any boat, no matter what it’s shaped, won’t sail WELL if it didn’t have any oars or at least a rudder. This is the first misleading piece of info in this wikipedia page.

After examining old and new photos and footages of the Euphrates River’s current, it’s clear that all the Kuphar users needed were long oars, just like what we see in the photographic evidence that we have from early XXth century A.D. The current of the Euphrates River takes the Kuphar downstream “naturally”, so all the travelers had to do is to let themselves be carried away by the current. No need of any type of propeller. They simply needed oars long enough to push the Kuphar away from a boulder or the edges of the river = using the oars as batons, to avoid collision. Or if they needed to reach the shores of the river, then they would “row” their way there, going sideways. So no, the Armenian traders didn’t row themselves all of the way from the Armenian plateau down to Mesopotamia like what is insinuated in Wikipedia. It was more or less like an effortless, smooth ride than an exhausting one with loads of physical labor.

Another landmine: Again, I would like anons to take note of the AKKADIAN origin of the word Kuphar. It’s also important to note this “basket” image projected in wikipedia, making it sound like it’s not strong enough to carry much weight. Well, anons, just take a look at the pictures from early XXth century; then tell me, how much do these men in the Kuphar weight according to you? Isn’t the load heavy? So even if this Kuphar is like a “basket” it’s solid enough to keep afloat with the weight of so many men and sail them safely. In other words, if this Kuphar could carry so many men, in one go, it could also carry a couple of traders with a couple of mules and wine amphorae or foals.

So far, (((they))) don’t want us to know that the Kuphar is safe to navigate down the Euphrates and (((they))) don’t want us to know it can carry weight despite the fact it’s made of light material.

• Page 18 –

>>9208209

(Please read from the start)

Next is the historical part about the Kuphar: they said the Kuphar was used during the Assyrian & even Babylonian period, but this is disputed. It is not disputed. (((They))) only want you to think it’s disputed. It turned out to be much much older than this. Remember what I keep on saying about the text matching the archeological artifact and not the other way around? Well anons, there is this CLAY WARE in the Louvre Museum, from Cyprus, and dating back from around 2300-2000 BC. Not my words anons, just take a look at this:

https://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/model-boat-figures

What do you think anons? Is this a Kuphar or not? Sorry, I don’t believe the “disputed text” but I do believe what my eyes see and tell me this is a Kuphar we have and it goes all the way back to the Bronze Age. Anons, please do take notice of the details, the” woven basket” like design but mostly the shape of the heads of the passengers = ALL 8 of them. How they sat on the periphery of the Kuphar. This is very very interesting, because it made me think that the travelers could put the merchandise in the middle of the boat = the center of the circle and they, the travelers, could sit on the periphery and use the oars if they are about to collide with the edge of the river. This is where I’ve started to believe that the circular shape of the Kuphar was intentional, it was an advantage, not a handicap like what (((they))) want us to believe in this Wikipedia page.

Well anons, I also landed on Herodotus, specifically this passage mentioned in Wikipedia. Did anyone notice Herodotus just confirmed that the Kuphar was used by ancient Armenians to come down from the plateau to Mesopotamia to sell their merchandise? If they reached Mesopotamia using the Kuphar to navigate the Euphrates, then they could also use it to reach the latitude of Aleppo and then go by land to the Coast using those mules, ass or jackasses mentioned. Yes, it’s very doable and most importantly, it’s less time consuming. The river makes them win time by shortening the traveling distance and the water current is like a natural propeller making it faster than walking on foot. Being on a Kuphar is less tiresome than walking and it keeps the merchandise steady and safe from all the disadvantages I’ve mentioned before, mostly the wild animals. If you think about it, they truly don’t need to camp on the river banks at all, just take turns in sleeping and navigating while staying on the Kuphar. I don’t know exactly how long it takes, but everything is pointing out that the travelers can reach Mesopotamia in a few days via the Kuphar, instead of weeks via walking themselves there.

Herodotus did provide us with further details about the materials the Kuphar was constructed with and how the travelers returned = this time by land via donkeys. So in other words, they went down via the Kuphar from the plateau and returned there using donkeys because the Euphrates current is a one way flow. And very interestingly Herodotus mentions there are different sizes of Kuphar used. Well that makes sense: if one is selling only animals skins, they don’t need a big Kuphar to come down from the plateau with the merchandise.

Then, in the Wikipedia article, they try to cast shade on Herodotus words by saying he exaggerated with the weight a Kuphar can carry. Well, maybe, maybe not. But you see, what they said next in Wikiepdia is true: when they mentioned that there are some Assyrian bas reliefs. Just take a look for yourselves anons. What do your eyes see in those boats? Aren’t these cut stones stacked inside a Kuphar? I personally don’t care how much weight the Kuphar can carry, as long as it can carry it. If it’s 9 tones or 20 tones it doesn’t make a difference for me, as long as it can carry big weights it means it can carry the wine amphorae and the foals. So you see anons, here again, the text (of Herodotus) matches the archeological findings.

• Page 19 –

>>9208218

(Please read from the start)

Another detail given by Herodotus which turned out to be factual is the use of Bitumen or simply Asphalt to coat the Kuphar with. Don’t forget anons, Armenia is a volcanic Plateau, there are plenty of Asphalt there. The natural bitumen I’m putting the picture of is found in big quantities in even modern day Armenia. When I went there, I asked my guide to show me some and he did. We simply drove to the place and we parked on the side of the road, got out of the car, walked a couple of meters and I started seeing those black bitumen rocks scatted everywhere like black gem stones. The place was covered with them.

You see anons, Herodotus text from “The Histories” (I) does match not just the archeological artifacts but also geological facts about Armenia = the Bitumen. Apart the probably weight exaggeration (it’s possible), I say most of what he reported is accurate. I personally trust 90 % of what he wrote about the Kuphar.

So for me, I’m very convinced that the Armenian traders used the Kuphar to transport their merchandise down the Euphrates River and then followed the road from Aleppo latitude to reach the East coast of the Med Sea. See Euphrates River Map 1.

I know there might be some anons out there reading this whom are still not convinced by the use of the Kuphar by the Armenians to come down from the plateau. Well, this is easily solved by a suggestion of mine: LET’S DO IT = in archeology the best way to clear an uncertain point is to redo the experiment ourselves. I’ve said many times that archeologists are exactly like forensic scientists and this is so true. When we reach a point in our research where we need more “clarity” and we are not certain of the results a 100%, we actually do the experiment ourselves – just like what you see in the TV series called S.C.I. In this specific case, we should rebuilt a Kuphar ourselves just like mentioned by Herodotus, then put wine amphorae in it and navigate down from the plateau on the Euphrates. It’s going to need patronage but it’s an experiment that can be done. So what the results are going to turn out to be anons? I don’t doubt it myself, for me it’s clear. It’s not going to be hard to prove this by doing the experiment.

Now the next part of the Kuphar in Wikipedia – Biblical significance – when they mention Professor Irving Finkel. This professor’s work on the supposed Babylonian tablet was not around when I was conducting my own research decades ago. So when I recently learned about him I decided to go check him out and his tablet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Finkel

“Dr Irving Leonard Finkel (born 1951) is a British philologist and Assyriologist. He is currently the Assistant Keeper of Ancient Mesopotamian script, languages and cultures in the Department of the Middle East in the British Museum, where he specialises in cuneiform inscriptions on tablets of clay from ancient Mesopotamia.”

>> Incredible pedigree at first sight, but then many red flags starts pop all over. Here are a few of them:

“Finkel was born in 1951.[2] He earned a PhD in Assyriology from the University of Birmingham under the supervision of Wilfred G. Lambert with a dissertation on Babylonian exorcistic spells against demons.”

>> Incredible how it’s always the “exorcistic spells against demons” that attract scientists with high pedigree like this professor.

• Page 20 –

>>9208228

(Please read from the start)

“In 2014, Finkel's study of a cuneiform tablet that contained a Flood narrative similar to that of the story of Noah's Ark, described in his book The Ark Before Noah, was widely reported in the news media.[5][6] The ark described in the tablet was circular, essentially a very large coracle or kuphar and made of rope on a wooden frame. The tablet included sufficient details of its dimensions and construction to enable a copy of the ark to be made at about 1/3 scale and successfully floated, as documented in a 2014 TV documentary Secrets of Noah's Ark that aired as an episode of PBS's NOVA series.[7]

Finkel is an Honorary Member of the Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity of the University of Birmingham and a Council Member of the Anglo-Israel Archaeology Society.”

>> I’m NOT so sure about his findings, or about that “incredible” cuneiform tablet of his. It’s too “clean” anons, way too “clean”, mostly that crack. And of course, he gotta be a member of the Anglo ISRAEL archeology society. Why is this important? Well, maybe because they are part of the mafia archeologists group that falsifies artifacts and plant them in digging sites (mostly in Israel) as one big con job. Yeah, I know their methods very well.

“Among his breakthrough works is the determination of the rules of the Royal Game of Ur.”

>> UR!!!…..Incredible!….Isn’t that where Abraham came from?

“Finkel founded the Great Diary Project, a project to preserve the diaries of ordinary people. In association with the Bishopsgate Institute, Finkel has helped to archive over 2,000 personal diaries. In 2014, the V&A Museum of Childhood held an exhibition of the diaries of children written between 1813 and 1996.”

“Finkel has written a number of works of fiction for children.”

>> I found his hobby of writing children’s book very odd. I’m an archeologist as well, if I wanted to write a book, children’s books are the last category of books I would be thinking of writing.

“Finkel was raised as an Orthodox Jew but became an atheist as a teenager.”

>> I don’t think I need to comment on this part, do I anons?

Anons, for me, just by looking at him and his tablet, this supposed professor is nothing but a paid fraud here to muddy the waters. All the attention his work got, just to prove that the Ark was circular, like a giant Kuphar… Someone was backing him up. And like what I just said, this professor is a plant put in place to muddy the water and try to DISTORT history. They are trying to manipulate us AGAIN by trying to convince us with fake evidences that Noah’s ark was circular in form and NOT elongated. And Qteam proved him wrong, not me. Anons will understand me better when I get to that part. Just be patient with me a bit longer till I finish with this, I don’t want to leave any loose ends before I get to other parts.

Anons can read all they want about Irving Finkel online, plenty of articles and publicity about him and his precious tablet, which got displayed at the British Museum apparently.

• Page 21 –

>>9208238

(Please read from the start)

And of course the last part of the Biblical significance part of the Kuphar in Wikipedia hints to Moses and the basket he was found it. Incredible how (((they))) like to use one’s faith to get them believe whatever (((they))) write. There is no evidence of any type suggesting Moses’ basket was a small kuphar, nor any type of evidence suggesting it wasn’t. So to bring this issue up and rub it in our faces this way; makes me wonder what (((their))) aim is in all of this.

In the last section of Kuphar in Wikipedia, the coracles are mentioned as being a post-form of its ancestor the Kuphar. So before moving on, I would like to check the Coracle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coracle

“The coracle is a small, rounded,[1] lightweight boat of the sort traditionally used in Wales, and also in parts of the West Country and in Ireland, particularly the River Boyne,[2] and in Scotland, particularly the River Spey. The word is also used of similar boats found in India, Vietnam, Iraq and Tibet.[3] The word "coracle" is an English spelling of the original Welsh cwrwgl, cognate with Irish and Scottish Gaelic currach, and is recorded in English text as early as the sixteenth century. Other historical English spellings include corougle, corracle, curricle and coricle.”

This is an interesting reading as well, and of course, Professor Irving Finkel is right in the middle of the theory of Noah’s ark was a huge coracle, thanks to his incredible gift of deciphering that amazing cuneiform tablet. Sorry if I sound sarcastic a bit in here anons. You will understand me in the next segment.

Before I head there, I want to point out there I noticed how many articles and research there is out there about the Coracle, and most “sound fun”. Which got me scratching my head: if you compare the “tone” in the coracle articles to that of the Kuphar articles. It’s like they are insinuating the first one is cool while the second is uncool; as if they want to divert our attention from the Kuphar to the Coracle.

I’ve found some articles just for those who like to read as a sport but what caught my attention is the British at the turn of the century, they were quite fond of the coracle. Here again, just like in the inscription of Behistun, I had this feeling of cabal finding the same stuff that I have, but a century or so before I did.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/23Fbd5ybr2CFG9BWYYZ7MZh/coracles-the-surprising-history-of-britain-s-strangest-boat

https://www.nature.com/articles/143224c0

I’m just putting these up as samples, there are plenty like them. What is important is the notion of those “basket boats” existing, for me the details and the up and downs don’t interest me that much at this point of the research. I’ve also tried to locate/pin on a World Map where we found coracles/Kuphar. I anons found more location, please feel free to add them to the map and share it with us.

• Page 22 –

>>9208251

(Please read from the start)

Back then, I didn’t have internet info/access as I do right now, so I did everything manually and I had to read everything from books and look for the photographs and maps from the archives, magazines and papers. Most of the modern day books I’ve read back then all referred to one specific book called: “Histoire du peuple Arménien”; written by Jacques De Morgan. Did the Last Name ring a bell for anons? You hit the bull’s-eye if you think he is from the Morgan bloodline family, because he is.

READ CAREFULLY PLEASE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_de_Morgan

“Jean-Jacques de Morgan (3 June 1857, Huisseau-sur-Cosson, Loir-et-Cher – 14 June 1924) [1] was a French mining engineer,[2] geologist, and archaeologist. He was the director of antiquities in Egypt during the 19th century,[3] and excavated in Memphis and Dashur, providing many drawings of many Egyptian pyramids. He also worked at Stonehenge, and Persepolis, and many other sites.

He also went to Russian Armenia, as manager of a copper mine at Akhtala. "The Caucasus is of special interest in the study of the origins of metals; it is the easternmost point from which prehistoric remains are known; older than Europe and Greece, it still retains the traces of those civilizations that were the cradle of our own."

In 1887-89 he unearthed 576 graves around Alaverdi and Akhatala, near the Tiflis-Alexandropol railway line.”

“His father Eugène, also called "Baron" de Morgan, was an engineer in mineral findings. His interests were in entomology and prehistory. He named his two sons, Henry and Jacques. His sons later got into fieldwork, excavating the Campigny faults near Rouen with him, which had lent its name to the first phase of the European Neolithic. With his father Jacques became acquainted with Gabriel de Mortillet, who was connected with the museum of national antiquities in Saint-Germain during investigations of Merovingian cemeteries, and who showed him how to catalogue excavated objects. De Morgan's goal was to be a professional geologist like his father, and his personal lifestyle had given him a way to travel and study since his early youth. In 1879 he started to publish the results of his research, illustrated with drawings that were notable for their finesse and documentary precision.”

“De Morgan travelled to Susiana as he attempted to retrace the routes of the Assyrian campaigns in Elam. He arrived in Susa, former capital of Elam, which had been explored six years previously by an expedition led by Marcel Dieulafoy. As he explored the ruins outside the small village of Shush, his curiosity was aroused by the high mound known as "the Citadel", at the foot of which he recovered some flints and old potsherds.

These finds led him to reopen excavations at the site. In Tehran he confided his plans to the French minister, René de Balloy, who was eager to obtain a monopoly for France of archaeological research in Persia. It took time, however, before these efforts, under de Morgan's guidance, were successful. In the meantime he published his Mission scientifique en Perse, with four volumes of geological studies; two volumes of archaeological studies on tombs and other monuments that were still seen; one volume dedicated to Kurdish dialects and the languages of northern Persia; one volume of Mandaean texts; and two volumes of geographical studies.

“ The excavations at Susa were headed by Jacques de Morgan in 1897 and carried on by others until the outbreak of World War I. Among their many discoveries are eight perforated plaques, three of them whole or nearly whole, and the rest fragmentary.[9]

”

The most important find, however, was the famous Victory Stele of Naram-Sin, brought to Susa as war booty by the Elamite king Shutruk-Nahhunte.”

• Page 23 –

>>9208283

(Please read from the start)

Anons, just look at the places he went to and where he worked =The pyramids, Elam, Persia, Armenia and the cherry on top of the cake was Stonehenge. He was on a mission, he was searching for something, and I believe he found it. He got the answers he was looking for. Really ? And I’m curious to know if he was also prospecting for oil in the Middle East. When was Standard oil established again? What are the odds of cabal Middle Eastern plans being put in place back then? And this Jacques bloodline guy had a double mission: not just archeological discoveries for cabal, but he is most probably providing them with geological data of the region, mostly where the oil is.

His book about the history of the Armenian people is to be read with extreme caution. In the first chapter of this book of his, he totally dismissed in a couple of lines the navigation on Euphrates while flowing in the Armenian Highlands. His excuse was that the current was too rough, there are a lot of boulders and there are waterfalls, mostly when you enter Syria. So according to him, the only navigation possible is from a place from the latitude of Aleppo all the way down to the South-East. Hearing of waterfalls, I thought at first he was talking about something like the Niagara’s falls, but most turned out to be small falls, the type of falls similar of what we have on the Nile = the cataracts. If ancient Egyptians could navigate through the Nile’s cataracts, it means navigation can also be done on the Euphrates River. And on top of everything, even though he cites Herodotus and the Anabasis, De Morgan only picks up the passages from these texts that suit him, dismissing the information I’ve mentioned before. No mention of any archeological artifact and no mention how the Armenian merchandise reached the shores of the Med Sea. In the first chapter, he is supposedly going through Armenia’s geography, but it’s just scrambled eggs for the reader. He jumps from one historical period to another in such a way that the reader can get easily confused; going from the Elamites, to the Crusades, to the Assyrians, to the Romans, to the Ottomans, to the Medes etc. Mixing the names of everything and everyone of all the periods in one big pot. This is geography we are talking about, honest physical geography, not a novel. So why scramble everything and confuse the reader?

Anons, I don’t believe the so called waterfalls are something that stopped the travelers from the plateau from navigating on the Euphrates while it was still on the Armenian Highland. If there was a waterfall, the travelers would just disembark, cross that section on foot, and then embark again, going downstream. Even by doing this, they still traveled safer and faster via the Kuphar than by foot. If it was done on the Nile, it could have been done on the Euphrates as well. Modern day technology helped me take a look at the Euphrates River as it flows on the highland (taking in consideration the recent dams built). I saw nothing that would HALT or OBSTRUCT travelers on their journey. Sure there are BUMPS and a bit of inconveniences that can be overcomed, mostly if you are a veteran traveler, but this doesn’t mean the Euphrates flowing in the Armenian Highland is not navigable. And to make it worse, it seems most modern day historians writing about Armenia, didn’t even bother to check this Jacques guy and simply took his word for it and kept on using him as source and reference for their books.

If anons are still doubting about this issue, I repeat myself: LET’S DO IT, let’s navigate on the Euphrates from the plateau all the way down to Bagdad. This should put away all doubts about this issue.

At this stage in the research, multiple questions kept of bothering me = Why totally dismiss this? Why did De Morgan use the tactic: Look here not there? What did he found out? WHAT ARE (((THEY))) HIDDING? WHAT IS IT (((THEY))) DON’T US TO FIND OUT ABOUT? If anons look at this, it’s just a stupid circular basket boat that came down from the Armenian Highlands, so why put all of this effort to make it sound insignificant, take the spotlight from it, HIDE IT? And remember, back then, when I was doing my research, this professor Finkel was nowhere around. I finally got my answer when I landed on the ARK.

• Page 24 –

>>9208298

(Please read from the start)

I believe anons caught up on this when I put that Wikipedia page about the Kuphar. Yes, it’s about an ARK located on Mt. Ararat on the Armenian plateau. A lot call it Noah’s Ark, so I will go with that name for it.

A lot was written about this, big news in the newspapers, documentaries, expeditions, big headlines. They have “discovered” it, then “debunked” it and “rediscovered”, then “redebunked” so many times over the decades that I fell out of interest in it. Anons can read about this online, but mostly in old newspapers. This has been proven then debunked multiple times, just as many times as the shroud of Turin. The media and the printing business played a huge role, mostly in “debunking” the theory of this being Noah’s Ark. One of the many hurdles I had to tackle from the get go when I came to this place to post, was how do I prove this to anons. And to make it worse, I had that professor Finkel to deal with on top of everything. What could I have said that made anons believe this is the real thing, the real deal and it was not debunked as (((they))) claim it is? It’s one of the reasons why I hesitated this long before coming out and talking about all of this.

Well, let’s just say a little “miracle” happened and this came out not long ago:

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/researchers-say-3d-scans-will-reveal-noahs-ark-buried-turkish-mountains

by Tyler Durden

Sun, 12/01/2019 - 09:20

Authored by Robert Jay Watson via The Epoch Times,

The search for one of the most legendary boats of human history has made a potential breakthrough as multiple teams of scientists have zeroed in on a curious ship-shaped rise on Mt. Ararat in Turkey. The story of Noah’s Ark and the great flood that covered the earth, echoed in the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, has long fascinated archaeologists who have wondered if remnants of the boat are still to be found.

Satellite images, radiocarbon dating, and most recently, 3D scans of the site known as Durupınar have all given hope to researchers that solid evidence of the Ark may soon be found. “It’s a man-made object and it’s a ship form,” computer engineer and biblical researcher Andrew Jones told WZTV,

As per the description of Genesis 8:4, “And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat,” researchers have investigated the site, which lies around 2,000 meters (6,560 feet) above sea level and was first identified by a Turkish cartographer in 1959.

The location of the real Noah's Ark may have been confirmed by relic-hunters in a remote mountain range in eastern Turkey, with experts claiming images "show the entire ship buried underground."

Posted by Fox News on Thursday, November 21, 2019

The Durupınar formation is about 18 miles (29 kilometers) south of the summit of Mt. Ararat, which reaches up to 16,854 feet. After its discovery was announced in 1959, it generated enthusiasm among ark seekers around the world, including Tennessee biblical researcher Ron Wyatt. Today, the site is labeled Nuhun Gemisi (Noah’s Ship) by mapmakers and continues to generate interest.

“We’re not going to find a sign that says, ‘made by Noah and sons,’ but what other ship would it be on the side of a hill at 6,500-foot elevation in the mountains of Ararat?” Andrew Jones told WZTV. In the Bible, God tells Noah very specifically how to build the Ark and these details have aided researchers in their quest.

This could be huge!”

• Page 25 –

>>9208315

(Please read this from the start)

“Posted by Daily Mail on Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Genesis 6:15 states, “This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high.” These dimensions, as per the best guesses archaeologists have made about the length of a “cubit,” would yield a ship that was 540 feet long, 37.5 feet high, and 75 feet wide.

This size corresponds to the strange, seemingly buried object found in the rise at Durupınar, according to ark hunters. While in previous attempts to find evidence they produced wooden samples from the site that were dated to 4,800 years old with radiocarbon dating, they are now trying to produce an image of what’s buried inside the mound.

Using a technique called “electrical resistivity,” Jones and others on his team have been trying to produce a quality 3-D image to counter skeptics.

“If you shoot an electrical current below the ground and it hits a pocket of air, that has a different type of conductivity versus something like water or rock,” Jones explains. “So, the software can interpret the signals coming back and create a 3-D image.”

Besides the dimensions, which appear to correspond to the ark specifications, Jones claims to have seen other details that match the design. As Genesis 6:16 says, “Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit high all around. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks.

Jones claims that images have shown just this. They have seen “[a] perfectly preserved hull below the ground. Petrified, solid, hull of a ship and three different layers, just like The Bible says.” The next step would be to get authorization from Turkish authorities to start excavations.

Besides the evidence of the Ark itself, researchers seeking to prove that Noah’s story has basis in archaeological evidence have also looked at the flood itself. A group of researchers led by British archaeologist Chris Turney found solid evidence for a flood that covered the land between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean over 8,300 years ago.

“We looked at all the earliest data on farming in Europe and we found a little bit of farming in Greece and the Balkans just before the flood,” Turney explained to Reuters.

“When the flood happened, farming seemed to stop but it was re-established a generation later across Europe.”

The findings seem to indicate a large number of people displaced from their homes by the waters.

For those that lived in this part of the Fertile Crescent, “it would have seemed like the whole world had flooded,” Turney said.”

Anons can check this out themselves. I’ve taken a look back in time, in recent times that is and I discovered that there had been multiple attempts, mostly over the few last years to get this story out. And I strongly believe it’s either by Potus/Qteam or by the alliance. Here are some stuff about it. The notable things are the dates these were published and the fossils, mostly maritime fossils:

https://answersingenesis.org/noahs-ark/noahs-ark-found/noahs-ark-mount-ararat/

https://www.ancient-origins.net/human-origins-religions/evidence-noah-s-ark-landed-mountain-17-miles-south-ararat-009725

As I just said, I found many attempts of disclosing this to the public over the decades as I rewind things and went back in modern times. Each time the “tada” moment comes, the media kills the momentum of the story and then it gets buried and forgotten. At this point old thoughts came back to me; the ones I had from when I was looking at the Euphrates River Map 4 = COULD IT POSSIBLE THE SUMERIANS CAME OUT FROM THE ARK? These thoughts kept on bugging me. We know people used the kuphar to come down from the Armenian Highlands ever since the early Bronze Age (I didn’t write all of that to anons for nothing) and instead of going West or East, they could have simply continued South-East and established on the shores just where the Euphrates and Tigris rivers get closer to one another.

• Page 26 –