Derivation, Bias, and the Closed Door
Why Some Connections Are Accepted—and Others Dismissed
There is a quiet rule in historical and linguistic study: connections must be proven through strict, traceable chains. On the surface, this sounds reasonable. But in practice, something more selective is happening. Some connections—especially those that reinforce familiar narratives—are accepted with ease. Others, even when supported by patterns of contact, symbolism, and repetition, are dismissed early, sometimes without full examination.
This is more than just looking at the evidence, it becomes a question of what kinds of connections are allowed to be considered.
The Problem of the Closed Door
It is widely accepted that the ancient Mediterranean was a network of exchange:
Greek thinkers learned from Egypt. (so Herodotus and others tell us)
Roman religion absorbed Egyptian and eastern traditions, particularly from 300 BC (before christ) through 300 AD (a span of 600 years).
Though the EXPLANATION of it was contested. Conservative Roman elites saw the transition as a decay of traditional morality, leading to periodic state suppression of older religions.
We often call Classical Studies Grecco/Roman, when the two cultures were very different, and Greek culture was highly influenced by Egyptian life, especially through Cretan history.
Through Rome, there is the obvious adoption of Egyptian traditions (like Isis, Serapis), Persian traditions (Mithras, another version of a sun god, Ra).
And Early Christianity emerged in a world already full of layered symbolic systems. There is no christianity as a spontaneous religion on its own, it was deep mid story of thousands of years of life between Africa and the Middle East that formed the stories there.
No serious historian denies any of this.
And yet, when we move from broad acknowledgment to specific patterns—connections in language, symbolism, or continuity—the tone changes. Suddenly, the standard becomes absolute proof or nothing at all. While some things are accepted without question. Like aust/east means something to do with a rising sun, but nobody really knows why, an absolute no is allowed in saying it is connected to the Aset in Egypt, who was the queen of the rising sun and brightest star in the sky.
Egypt Was Not Peripheral
Ancient Egypt was one of the most stable, long-lasting, and symbolically sophisticated civilizations in human history. It influenced neighboring regions for thousands of years.
And yet, modern framing often minimizes this influence.
Even terminology reveals bias. Egyptian religious systems are frequently labeled in diminishing terms, like “cult” being anything non-Christian, while Greek, Roman, and later Christian traditions are framed as structured “religions.” Language shapes perception—and perception shapes conclusions.
It was the star of the Roman treasure. It literally gave us the word star, and EAST.
Archaeological evidence does not support this kind of marginalization. The study of the past tells a different story than the one allowed to be published until very very recently.
In places like Ostia, a port of Rome in what is now Turkey, Egyptian deities like Isis and Serapis (an accepted hybrid god person) were central. Highly connected with water and sailors in an important port town that WAS a capital of the Roman Empire for a time. These gods, within Rome, were widely venerated, paid for by Roman state, integrated into public and private life, and connected with many major traditions. Their presence appears in temples, homes, inscriptions, and everyday objects. The number and scale of the temples tell us there is something to see.
This is not the footprint of a marginal “cult.”
It is the presence of a living, adaptive religious system, one that never left us.
The Case for Cumulative Evidence
The resistance to certain connections often rests on a narrow definition of proof. But ancient systems do not always leave behind clean, linear trails. Instead, they leave overlapping forms of evidence:
1. Transmission Routes: Egypt, Canaan, the Levant, Crete, Greece, and Rome were connected through trade, conquest, migration, and shared space. Contact is not hypothetical—it is historically established.
2. Semantic Continuity: Across these regions, we repeatedly see the same symbolic structures:
Sun → power → rulership
Light → truth → divine authority
Mother → throne → legitimacy
Water → origin → renewal
Recurring frameworks of meaning.
3. Phonetic Patterns: Clusters of sound appear alongside these meanings:
RA / RE associated with radiance, rule, and central power
IS / AST / EAST linked to cycles, dawn, and renewal
MR / M / MA associated with motherhood and beloved figures
Individually, each of these can be dismissed. Together, they form a pattern that deserves attention.
Against Premature Dismissal
Critics often respond quickly:
“There is no proof.” when we have proof of book burnings and major suppression cycles and laws forbidding continuance of the traditions and languages supressed.
“These are coincidences.” Just sounds the same. Nothing to see here. When nobody can say a connection does not exist, just that they do not see it yet. That is the only real thing to say. It is more accurate to say there could be a connection than there is not one.
The more honest position is that when historical contact, symbolic continuity, and phonetic patterns align, the possibility of connection should remain open. There is no reason to slam the door. More evidence opens daily.
Take the Easter goddess connection to the Germanic Tradition of Easter. A whole month celebrating a goddess, the month literally named after her. A well-regarded Christian German Historian named Bede in 800 AD saying it is where the world comes from. Where nobody else could give a reason. The modern quick answer? No. That was before more evidence of “Astrohennae”, evdence of female goddess worship in the same areas, 7090 years prior, when Jesus would have walked, within Roman territory. Does that old white guy come back to apologize and revisit the data? No. And the bias passes down generationally. But the science begs use to continuously reconsider new things.
Selective Trust in Historical Sources
Ancient authors are frequently used to support accepted narratives. This is fact. Damnacio memorea, chrsitiano intpretae, changing the story to fit christian terms, cutting out people from history, even emperors, when they want to rewrite the narrative. An intense history of book burnigns and etchings from stone and even failed attempts to knock down pyramids, all did not work. Did for thousand years, when peopole were mostly illiterate and scared to the cultic devilish imaginings of christians through the Middle Ages, but that is a Christian story, not a pagan one. The devil never really existed like that, he was an adversary, someone that pushes you to be your best. Not a scary thing that just wants to do bad things. That is a total christian creation.
If a writer like Herodotus describes Egyptian influence on Greece, he is cited as evidence of contact. But when that same contact suggests deeper continuity, and giving credit to places like Africa, or India, or the “Middle East”, or Semetic speaking people, the implications are often minimized.
The Weight of Cultural Bias
The history of scholarship itself matters.
In the 1700’s and 1800’s centuries, following directly after the translation of Egyptian material around 1823—opened new possibilities for understanding ancient connections. There was curiosity, debate, and a willingness to explore links across Africa, the Mediterranean, and the Near East all through the late 1800’s. There is a lot of evidence of people saying, “Oh wow, I recognize parts of the Christian story here.” But quickly, the official tone shifted when things were starting to get a little uncomfortable for those in power. At the time, religion still had major influence on scholarlship and science and politics.
Many germanic historians seemed to have a deep distrust in anything of African and Egyptian and Semetic origin, just look at the names of scholars to see the roots of naziism spread. then the hesitation to link any gratitude to African roots- when it was the pope himself who made the whole slave trade possible, telling those in power it is okay to take over land of people not willing to convert, to treat them as animals. Without the official head of the Christian Catholic's blessing, no ruler would have dared treated humans or any life as brutally. And that kind of bias sticks for hundreds of years. Still to today, where cultural studies are insanely surface level.
As religion, nationalism, and emerging academic disciplines became more rigidly structured, interpretations narrowed. Boundaries hardened. Certain connections became “unacceptable.”
Then we saw a shift, when people wanted national pride to break away from overlord Empires like Britain, Rome and christianity, they dug into those folk stories, the ones that showed they were different, united, and a cohesive unit.
We see similar patterns elsewhere, and they happen to be about more than half the population of the earth, all of the female sex, as well as anyone not European.
Archaeological assumptions about men in important grave sites later overturned by DNA evidence- they were women with weapons in the most important graves.
The dismissal of female-centered systems or deities as deriving from a male source (because we don’t understand how life works, coming from a woman and needing of cooperation).
The reluctance to recognize Africa as a central source to many important concepts, not just for words of exotic foods and animals.
These are mistakes., either manipulations or mistranslations and misunderstanding or a refusal to look at the full picture. And they are not isolated. They reflect patterns of interpretation shaped by cultural context.
Alexandria and the Assembly of Knowledge
It is not incidental that Alexandria—an African city—was a center of intellectual life, where both texts of the Bible, both new and old, were compiled, translated, and preserved.
Not just by others on African Soil, but people native to Africa giving interpratations of something in the sand and water there.
The formation of biblical traditions, the interaction of Greek and Egyptian thought, and the preservation of ancient knowledge all passed through this environment. You could not talk about early christianity, or the formation of Christanity at all without talking about Jews and Africans.
Power, Land, and the Loss of Voice
Egyptian systems of rulership were not abstract. They were tied directly to land, fertility, and sustainability. Kingship was not only authority—it was responsibility to maintain balance between people and environment.
As external powers took control—whether Greek, Roman, or later systems—the relationship between land, labor, and governance shifted. Extraction replaced balance. Taxation increased. Local systems were overridden.
The result was not only political change but cultural silencing.
When the structures that sustain meaning are disrupted, what remains are fragments—symbols without context, words without memory.
A More Honest Position
This article does not argue that every word or symbol can be traced to a single origin. That would be an oversimplification.
The ancient world was interconnected.
Its ideas moved, merged, and survived in layered forms.
When multiple lines of evidence suggest continuity, the responsible response is not denial—but investigation.
Closing
Every connection does not have to proven beyond any old Christian white man’s doubt.
The point is that many are closed off before they are fully explored- in absolute contradiction of the scientific method.
An honest study of history does not begin with refusal.Science does not work by saying “No”. It starts by saying, “what if”.
Science and the real story of our shared collective past (not just biased his-story) begins with the willingness to look—fully, carefully, and without predetermined limits.