Canary Islands

Nov 2019
154
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
It is sure that they came from NA thats the profounded Explanation but then you have linguistic links to Mesoamerica for example the word Guan-che you find some places in america with the word Guan.The aztec Patterns of their Cloth look like the canary ones


Tribal-Striped-Pattern.jpg
But then you have accounts of nordictype canarians in northern Tenerife which would make Connection to northern europe.
Maybe some came from america some from Northafrica and some from northeurope???
 
Last edited:
Feb 2018
52
Morocco
Guanches developed...............naval defences? Trade? Goodness me. Meanwhile in the real world.......................





And do you know where they came from? Some say they may be related to berbers. But we don't know.
We can't talk about genetics here but it has already been proved that they were like modern North africans. Also they used some sort of Libyan script It's pretty obvious that they were berbers
 
Nov 2019
154
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
There is also a thread in this forum about aliens!
I would like to read your Explanation for Aztec Cloth paterns if they are not similar to old canari art.

And if you like tell me who build the pyramids in Guimar?
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,459
Portugal
I would like to read your Explanation for Aztec Cloth paterns if they are not similar to old canari art.
I don't know. And "I don't know" is a statement that many honest historians make to avoid fantasy and speculations.
What I do know is that, until now, no source was presented to us of a link betewn the two peoples. If I am incorrect, please present the source.

And if you like tell me who build the pyramids in Guimar?
Again, I don't know. Most probably the Canarians in the 19th century, as parently a research pointed, see: "Maria Cruz Jiménez Gómez/Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos, El complejo de las morras de Chacona (Güímar, Tenerife): resultados del proyecto de investigación, XII Coloquio de Historia Canario-Americana (1996), Cabildo Insular de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria 1998, vol. 1"

Or: Pirámides de Güímar - Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre

Again what I do know is that advancing with ideas without substance, without sources, is against the historical method, is falling in the exoterism, is denning history as Human and Social Science. And this is a history forum, not a exoteric one.

Back to the Pyramids, an academic article, by César Esteban, from the "Departamento de Astrofísica de la Universidad de La Laguna":
http://ml.ci.uc.pt/arquivos_antigos/archport/archport_20_11_2006_a_31_12_2014/pdfFC4oNozuZz.pdf (in Spanish)
 
Nov 2019
154
Bylanuelde,Alemannia
I don't know. And "I don't know" is a statement that many honest historians make to avoid fantasy and speculations.
What I do know is that, until now, no source was presented to us of a link betewn the two peoples. If I am incorrect, please present the source.
Me Too,I dont know; thats why i wrote "Maybe". I can only deal with artefacts or linguistic similarities.For Example on Teneriffe they got three classes "Achimenceyes"(King and families) Achiciquitza (Nobels) Achicaxana (normal Citizen) this looks very Aztec but it could be a mistranslation of letters which gave them a mesoamerican sound.
Again, I don't know. Most probably the Canarians in the 19th century, as parently a research pointed, see: "Maria Cruz Jiménez Gómez/Juan Francisco Navarro Mederos, El complejo de las morras de Chacona (Güímar, Tenerife): resultados del proyecto de investigación, XII Coloquio de Historia Canario-Americana (1996), Cabildo Insular de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria 1998, vol. 1"
Back to the Pyramids, an academic article, by César Esteban, from the "Departamento de Astrofísica de la Universidad de La Laguna":
http://ml.ci.uc.pt/arquivos_antigos/archport/archport_20_11_2006_a_31_12_2014/pdfFC4oNozuZz.pdf (in Spanish)


Yeah, they found a cup or something of modern time and a document from the 19th centuary very suspisious.

What these"Archeologicans" did not take under consideration is that Guimar has in totaly 9 Pyramids some are not restored yet.And Tenerife consist of 9 States back in the medivial.

Did modern Canarians wanted to keep the 9 kingdoms in Memory or coincidantly they build this amount of pyramids.

Why did they build them but did not Keep them short after they build them in the 19th century or are these Pyramids just older than the Investigacion results.

Or the Guanche didnt use them anymore since tenerif became catolic and old religious use of the pyramids disappeard?
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
6,459
Portugal
Me Too,I dont know; thats why i wrote "Maybe".
The “Maybe” opens the doors to many things. Hence, my allusion to aliens:

It is possibly? Yes.

It is probable with the available data? No.

I can only deal with artefacts or linguistic similarities. For Example on Teneriffe they got three classes "Achimenceyes"(King and families) Achiciquitza (Nobels) Achicaxana (normal Citizen) this looks very Aztec but it could be a mistranslation of letters which gave them a mesoamerican sound.
CroMag, I am a history teacher that has many difficulties in some areas, so I leave them to people that are specialised in them, in a scientific mater. I know almost to nothing about the pre-Hispanic Berber Canary language and I know almost to nothing about the pre-Colombian languages in Mesoamerica. Point me a study or two about it, made by experts on the field, that studied it.

Yeah, they found a cup or something of modern time and a document from the 19th centuary very suspisious.

What these"Archeologicans" did not take under consideration is that Guimar has in totaly 9 Pyramids some are not restored yet.And Tenerife consist of 9 States back in the medivial.

Did modern Canarians wanted to keep the 9 kingdoms in Memory or coincidantly they build this amount of pyramids.
What are the bases for those ideas/suspicions? Ground your reasoning, if not we can be able to bring the space aliens again, or any other theme, without any scientific ground!

Why did they build them but did not Keep them short after they build them in the 19th century or are these Pyramids just older than the Investigacion results.
Is there any research that points to older timelines? (and here I mean a scientific research)

Or the Guanche didnt use them anymore since tenerif became catolic and old religious use of the pyramids disappeard?
I could say again: “What are the bases for those ideas/suspicions?...”

But I am beginning to think that you are brainstorming. Well, that is a technique to bring new out of the box ideas. The problem is if we let them develop without ground.

Let me quote the article that I linked to you, by César Esteban:

“Pero, quizás, el despropósito más asombroso y serio que podemos ver en todo el parque lo tenemos en la guía de visita que reparten al entrar […]. En ella, se afirma lo siguiente: “Las excavaciones de prueba realizadas por arqueólogos de la Universidad de La Laguna confirmaron la idea de Heyerdahl de que estas estructuras eran construcciones arquitectónicas edificadas con propósitos ceremoniales por expertos constructores que habían estudiado los movimientos anuales del Sol”. En ningún momento, se las califica de prehispánicas –para curarse en salud–, pero lo que se afirma sobre su carácter ceremonial –solamente entendible si su origen es anterior a la conquista– es absolutamente falso, pues contradice los resultados de la investigación arqueológica publicada y comentada en detalle anteriormente [Jiménez Gómez y Navarro Mederos, 1998]. Flagrantes manipulaciones como éstas merecen su denuncia, pues personajes como Heyerdahl tienen en sus manos medios para enseñar nuestra historia al mundo, a nosotros y a nuestros hijos.”

My translación:

“But, perhaps, the astonishing and unreasonable purpose that we can see in all the park we it in the guide to enter […]. Where we can see the following statement: “The excavations carried out by archaeologists from the University of La Laguna confirm Heyerdahl's idea that these structures were architectural constructions built for ceremonial purposes by expert builders who had studied the annual movements of the Sun”. At any moment, they are qualified as pre-Hispanic - to cure themselves in health -, however, what is stated about their ceremonial character - only understandable if their origins are prior to the conquest - are absolutely false, because they contradict the results of the archaeological investigation published and commented on in detail [Jiménez Gómez and Navarro Mederos, 1998]. Flagrant manipulations as this deserve to be denounced, people like Heyerdahl have had their middle hands to teach a story to the world, to us and to others.”

Let me repeat some parts: “however, what is stated about their ceremonial character - only understandable if their origins are prior to the conquest - are absolutely false” and “Flagrant manipulations as this deserve to be denounced”.