Category Archives: Miscellaneous

Did Churchward Give Niven A Bad Name in 1926?

Posted on January 28, 2012 | Comments Off

While researching for my next book, “Lifting the Veil on Copies of Stone Tablets Found by William Niven,” I was reacquainted with the implication that James Churchward was responsible for sullying the reputation of Niven by publishing images of his tablets in the 1926 cult classic, “Lost Continent of Mu.”
While I certainly have no quarrel with Mr. Wicks or Mr. Harrison; if James’ translations/interpretations of the tablets really provoked the controversy that overshadowed Niven’s other great accomplishments, does James bear responsibility?

From the preface of Buried Cities, Forgotten Gods, William Niven’s Life of Discovery and Revolution in Mexico and the American Southwest, the biography of William Niven:

By 1910 Niven’s interests shifted to the Valley of Mexico,
where he was the first person to recognize that a stratigraphic
approach to the valley’s archaeology had chronological impli-
cations. In 1921 Niven unearthed the first of what would be-
come a collection of more than twenty-six hundred inscribed
stone tablets from various sites in the Valley of Mexico. Because
they are unlike any other artifacts recovered from the valley,
their authenticity is still not fully resolved. The controversy
over these inscribed tablets, especially after a number were
published by James Churchward in his occultist The Lost Conti-
nent of Mu (1926), provides a valuable look at the divergent
views regarding the origins and development of native Ameri-
can cultures current during the 1920s and’ 30s.

The same book provides that James never met or corresponded with Niven until after Niven wrote him a letter dated September 19, 1927 (page 238,) which is after the publication of the 1926 “Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men.” Prior to James’ correspondence with William Niven, James’ only access to Niven’s discoveries would have been through newspaper articles written on the subject. James would have had to see them somewhere before he could include them in the 1926 book. As shown in my book, “Lifting the Veil on the Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men“, almost the entirety of chapter 11 is contained in one article in James’ scrapbook, along with the only images shown of Niven’s tablets, which indicates that Niven’s promotion of his Mexico City discoveries (in a newspaper article) was ultimately responsible for their inclusion in the 1926 “Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men.”
From Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men page 114:

RELICS FROM NIVEN’S LOWEST CITY 1. Egyptian head. 2. Ancient Grecian vase. 3. A toy. 4. Little Chinaman

From Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men page 221:

Courtesy of the Dearborn Independent TABLETS FROM NIVEN’S MEXICAN BURIED CITIES. SECOND CITY

From Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Men page 222:

Courtesy of the Dearborn Independent TABLETS FROM NIVEN’S MEXICAN BURIED CITIES. SECOND CITY

Another random fact is William Niven and James Churchward were mentioned in a 1931 article entitled “Tracing the First Love Story Back to Ancient Mexico” from the Newspaper Features Service:

“In despair, only a few weeks ago, Niven sent it to Colonel James Churchward of London,
distinguished traveler, explorer and archaeologist, and member of the Royal Society. Colonel
Churchward has spent fifty years of his life delving far into antiquity, a great part of this time in
learning the most ancient languages of man in India and Thibet.

Colonel Churchward was delighted to be entrusted with the task of deciphering what was
so closely related to a literary work of his on a continent which he holds has been submerged in
the Pacific – and he was greatly gratified to find himself wholly familiar with the symbols used.
These symbols were in use many thousands of years before the time of Moses.

One might wonder the source of such an article (included in James’ scrapbooks) that paints ‘Colonel’ James Churchward in such high standing. The readers will have to answer the question themselves.

From James’ scrapbook under “Niven’s Buried Cities”:

Newspaper clipping from James Churchward's Scrapbooks

Subsequent publication of Niven’s discoveries in the 1931 “Children of Mu,” 1931 “Lost Continent of Mu” and the 1933 “Sacred Symbols of Mu” are a direct result of Niven sending rubbings or tracings of the tablets to James for interpretation. While I can’t vouch for the veracity of the translations, James simply engaged in what he was asked to do, interpret the tablets. None of the tablets were discovered after James became aware of them, so there can’t be any accusations James Churchward is involved in any hoax concerning these tablets (other than he may not have translated them properly.)

It should be mentioned that James Churchward was not the only one to hazard a guess as to the meaning of the tablets that Niven found. As mentioned in Buried Cities, Forgotten Gods, William Niven’s Life of Discovery and Revolution in Mexico and the American Southwest, Ludovic Mann (1869-1955), Glascow archaeologist, wrote to Niven:

Quite similar carvings have been found in the Old Hemisphere…
Buried Cities, Forgotten Gods, William Niven’s Life of Discovery and Revolution in Mexico and the American Southwest, page 233

and John Cornyn (1875-1941), specialist in Aztec literature, deciphered the iconography on the some of the tablets and placed them in the context of a Mexican cultural discoveries.
Buried Cities, Forgotten Gods, William Niven’s Life of Discovery and Revolution in Mexico and the American Southwest, page 236

Although Niven’s Guerrero collections are now in the American Museum of Natural History, the Peabody Museum of Harvard University, and elsewhere, the location of his finds from Santiago Ahuizoctla, Hacienda de Leon, Remedios, and Chimpala (the tablets discussed in Copies of Stone Tablets Found by William Niven at Santiago Ahuizoctla near Mexico City) is unknown. Other researchers continue to search for these tablets, but it appears (for now), that the only way we have to research them is to look at the available images that remain (see below.) The tablets existed, that part is assured. Whether or not those that created them had the same meaning as interpreted by James Churchward is quite another matter.

From 'Children of Mu' (facing page 41)

btw, Buried Cities, Forgotten Gods, William Niven’s Life of Discovery and Revolution in Mexico and the American Southwest has more photographed tablets than James Churchward shows in his books.

Certainly more is to be written about James’ ‘translation’ of William Niven’s discovery of 2600 tablets, especially if (and when) they again surface. Hopefully, the sensationalism will subside soon thereafter and permit an opportunity for serious academic research that will answer the questions. As indicated earlier, a knowledgeable expert already recognized and identified elements of Niven’s discoveries within standard Mexican cultural iconography. Just because the tablets are connected to the lost continent of Mu should not imply they are a hoax or should not be studied to ascertain the truth. Such a bias helps keep people in the dark about early Mexican history and stifles discussion.

Jack Churchward

Comments Off on Did Churchward Give Niven A Bad Name in 1926?

Posted in James Churchward, Miscellaneous, References to James' work

Old Map – New Interpretation (?)

Posted on December 27, 2011 | Comments Off

Recently I was sent a link to a website entitled, “Map of the Creator.” The link was sent along by a friend from Elle Ayat, the Central Asian healing system pioneered by an ethnic Uighur gentleman named Abdullaev Farhata Muhamedovicha (or Farhata) born in Aksu in 1937.

Abdullaev Farhata Muhamedovicha (or Farhata-ata), Founder of Elle Ayat

He has since passed on and I believe that he was selected by his Uyghur heritage – his genetics permitted him to access information that harkens back to the Great Uighur Empire. There is a mantra to chant that he purports changes consciousness, not just the person reciting the mantra, but others that he/she is connected with. My visit with Radik Kurbanov (October 2010) was described in the My-Mu.com podcast #23 and the mantra can be heard in the podcast. A followup was covered in this blog posting from early 2011.

The website includes two Pravda articles to say that the 3-D map is 120 million years old and that there was some form of writing on the enormous slabs. Originally it was thought that the inscription was Chinese, however closer examination indicates that is not the case.

So, is the ‘Map of the Creator’ proof positive that there was an ancient and formally unknown civilization in Central Asia?
Are the unidentified inscriptions similar to anything that James Churchward wrote about and described?
Is this map from the Great Uighur Empire as described by James Churchward?

I’ll leave these questions for others to answer, but I would like to interject with some further thoughts.
1. James Churchward’s theories include the hypothesis that the mountains were not raised until ten to twelve thousand (10,000 – 12,000) years ago. How could a map be made of mountains before they were raised?
2. If these maps are left behind from the cataclysm that destroyed the eastern half of the Great Uighur Empire, the inscriptions should resemble what James called ‘Uighur-Maya’ writing. According to James, all the people that left Mu in the peopling of the rest of the Earth were called ‘Maya’ and ‘Uighur-Maya’ denotes those individuals that traveled to Asia and formed Mu’s Primary Colony, the Great Uighur Empire.

More information about the Great Uighur Empire is available on the My-Mu.com website. The direct link to the page is here.

Have a great day.

Comments Off on Old Map – New Interpretation (?)

Posted in Great Uighur Empire, Miscellaneous

Is Sun a Cool Body?

Posted on December 28, 2009 | Comments Off

James Churchward’s first book, “Lost Continent of Mu Motherland of Man” (1926) was dedicated to Dr. G.L Tanzer. The following is an article by Dr. Tanzer that mentions “Col.” James Churchward. James also wrote an article about the sun entitled, “The Sun is Not a Superheated Body, He Declares“.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Is Sun a Cool Body?
Seattle Scientist Advances Theory Conflicting With Old Beliefs

Maintaining that the earth is not a hot body gradually cooling off, but a cool one, Dr. G. L. Tanzer, Seattle scientist is arousing much interest by his theory of “Cosmic reciprocity.” That other scientists share his view is indicated in a recent article by Dr. Robert Andrew Milliken, one of the world’s leading scientists in a national magazine in which he said:
“We firmly believed for many years that the sun was merely a white-hot body gradually cooling off. Now we know that if were merely that it would have cooled off long ago, and we are searching for the source of its continuous supply of heat and are inclined to the belief that it is due to some form of sub-atomic change.
Dr. Tanzer was recently honored by the dedication to him of a book, “The Lost Continent of Mu,” by Col. James Churchward, well-known writer. In explaining his beliefs in a recent address before the Women’s Progressive Thought Club of Seattle, Dr. Tanzer said in part:

By Dr. G. L. Tanzer

It is impossible to give a comprehensive idea of cosmic manifestations in a small booklet like “Cosmic Reciprocity” or in a short lecture. It would require many volumes to do justice to the subject and furnish sufficient evidence to satisfy progressive scientists that many theories accepted centuries ago and which are still upheld by present day science, do not conform with facts.

A few experiments conclusively prove that our heat does not come from the sun but is an earthly energy in reciprocal interchange with that of the sun. It is impossible that temperature can be measured with an optical pyrometer (termed a bolometer) which is a form of spectroscope, both being based on the prism, and used by scientists for measuring the heat of heavenly bodies, for the reason that the prism, or spectrum, does not record heat carrying rays. It either repels or is neutral to them. The prism or spectrum records light rays only which do not carry heat.

Proofs Given

Col. James Churchward, widely known for his great research work, who is full accord with the assertions made in “Cosmic Reciprocity,” gives the following proofs: First we took a cell filled with alum water, which allowed transmission to the LIGHT rays, and repelled the dark rays. After passing through the filter we focused the light rays on a thermometer – the temperature did not rise a degree. The optical pyrometer registered a temperature of 2,500 to 2,600 degrees Fahrenheit at the focus point. We then changed the cell, using one filled with an iodine solution, which allowed the DARK rays to pass through and repelled the light rays. The light at the focus point immediately disappeared. The optical pyrometer registered nothing, but the thermometer soon burst. Substances such as paper started burning at once at the focus point.

The forgoing experiments conclusively prove that the means which have been used to measure the temperatures of sidereal bodies are incapable of measuring temperatures.

The halo of clouds which surround the sun are said to contain elements with which we are acquainted, but with us they are in solid condition. This phenomenon appears to be another reason for believing the sun to be a super-heated body. This is no criterion whatever. Many of our solid elements can be converted into gaseous clouds with the aid of other elements, and, after the change from a solid to a gas has been made, the gases can be kept as gases without involving high temperatures. Many examples will be found in books on chemistry. While the spectroscope is supposed to show us some of the elements, it is not claimed by anyone that it discloses all; therefore it is not only possible but probable that there are elements in the sun’s clouds about which we know nothing, and that it is these unknown elements which keep all gases composing the sun’s clouds cool without solidifying. Is it not also possible that the gaseous elements supposed to be in the sun’s atmosphere are actually present in that of our earth?

The Sun’s Rays

We read in many scientific works that the sun is constantly sending forth flames hundreds of thousands of miles long. The sun’s so-called flames are rays – rays without heat because they are light rays and cold, as experiments have proved. An earthly example of the sun’s flashing is to be seen in the Aurora Borealis, also in an ordinary search light, neither of which carry heat rays. Combustion is unnecessary to produce visible rays, for visible rays emanate from radio actives such as radium, uranium, and thorium. Cold rays emanate from the glow worm, fire fly and many fishes.

Rays leave the sun’s body in the form of dark-ultra-invisible-parent rays which are the carriers of the sun’s forces. On passing through the sun’s atmosphere these parent rays divided- filtered out, the weaker light divisions become visible to the human eye. Beyond the sun’s atmosphere they cannot be seen because it is necessary for the rays to pass through elements to be seen. As soon as the sun’s rays with their forces arrive at the earth’s atmosphere, those carrying forces affinitive to earthly forces commence their work thus; the forces in the sun’s light rays set in motion the earth’s affinitive light forces and the phenomenon daylight, or sunlight, is the result.

Flames of the magnitude of the flashings of the sun’s light rays, would have consumed the sun millions of years ago. Flames are super-heated elementary gases coming from a combustion. Combustion is a thermal-analysis of a substance whereby a solid is transferred or transformed into gases. Therefore if scientists are right, the sun has deliberately committing suicide by burning herself up for millions of years. Such a contention cannot be maintained for a moment on any scientific or reasonable basis.

I firmly uphold my assertion that the sun is not a flaming mass, but a cool body like our earth, and I stand ready to meet any scientist who disagrees with me on a platform for a public discussion.

Questions Asked

Some very interesting questions could be put to those who may accept the invitation, for instance:
1 – Why should elementary heat from an alleged flaming sun travel 186,000 miles per second – thousands of times faster than lightning?

2 – Why, according to the U.S. weather bureau, was a temperature of plus 25 degrees centigrade at sea level, where the vapor pressure was ascertained to be 16.5mm, reduced to 19.5 degrees below zero centigrade at 7,000 meters where vapor pressure was found to be but 0.5 mm., and why did the temperatures between 13,000 and 20,000 meters altitude show a fixed degree of 55 degrees below zero centigrade where vapor pressure had reached its zero point?