I’m pleased to have Scott back on the air. I can tell immediately when his shows run because my blog hits go up a magnitude.
America Unearthed does not propose to be a rigorous scientific proof. It simply introduces alternative history ideas, takes a cursory look at items that claim to support the alternative view then it ends with a maybe. Next week we move on to a different idea.
First let’s look at the possible states of being for the Ark:
1. It’s a legend, talked about but never seen, like Bigfoot.
2. It did exist but was destroyed.
3. It still exists and was moved or hidden.
Legend: Given the biblical instructions regarding its construction, it is clear the ancient Hebrews knew how to make it. So why would they not make it? Also in Graham Hancock’s book, The Sign and the Seal, he refers to the existence of similar objects in Egypt, notably in the tomb of Tutankhamen. One might ask if that one shows any magical properties.
We can quickly conclude that there is no reason for it to not have existed.
Destroyed: It vanished about the time of the Babylonian conquest of the Hebrews. If the Babylonians had destroyed it then, it surely would have been bragged about in their records. No modern discussions of it, that I have found, mention such claims, although there are some biblical suggestions that it was probably destroyed by the Babylonians.
Moved and Hidden: This is the most likely outcome given the above two items.
So Scott has a reasonable basis for the idea that this thing still exists. He starts off with the idea that some Jewish princess, I suppose, escaped the Babylonian invasion of Judea and went to Ireland. She brought key religious artifacts with her, including the most sacred Ark and the Stone of Destiny.
I find this dubious. To my knowledge, there is no strong, or even weak, evidence connecting the ancient Middle East with Ireland, notwithstanding the Stone Age astronomical calendars like Stonehenge that, in less spectacular forms, exist all over Europe and down into the Middle East. These may have developed independently, or, as proposed in Uriel’s Machine and Civilization One, their construction may have been knowledge passed between culturals. I don’t know whether trade routes went from Judea to Ireland, but I do know they went from the Anasazi to Mexico and also to the California coast. I assume similar situations existed in the Old World.
But why would the Jewish priests send their most sacred items off to distant trading partner, when a much closer, much more connected culture, an ally, was at hand? Really, would priests want their most revered object in a place from which they might never be able to retrieve it, or would they send it to a well established ally, from whom they could retrieve it later?
That ally was Ethiopia. Both peoples have many references regarding their interactions. It is accepted knowledge. There are modern day Ethiopian Jews and Christians who trace their history back to the very beginnings of those religions. Some believe that the Queen of Sheba was Ethiopian. What better way to strengthen an alliance than to intermarry the ruling families?
And the Ethiopians claim to have the Ark of the Covenant!
The Sign and the Seal is a well documented argument that the Ark is in Ethiopia. Certainly many Ethiopians believe it to be. They have celebrations regarding it.
The Sign and the Seal is long, and I admit I began to skip through it after awhile, but if you want to see a more substantial proposal regarding the Ark’s location, then it is there to read.