The Sphinx head - Is it the original?

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Because I know that you (harte) have ego and that you are tactican and strategist I know you will hit harder at weakest point of my earlier post.

Here is answer in advance.

Edited May 14, 2013 by the L

[Big Bad Voodoo]

In one village in Swiss there is a sign on French, German and English to not cut flowers.

Even they are very similar languages on each language Message sent by sender to reciver is same but on different languages to different reciver some sentence are meaningless.

You cant literally translate word Free market on Russian.

You cant use word Hai (yes) on Japanesee as "Yes Im writting invoice" but you can use it in different contest.

Or how Inuits and English have many words for different types of snow. We Croats dont have many words for different types of snow.

Or as French have words which doesnt exist in English.

Phonetics, Morphology, Sintaxes is one thing but semantics something different.

To understand one language you must understand that culture completly. Thats why when people want to study Indian language college is called Indiology. Or Japanesee- Japanology.

Some of sayings from Croatia would be complete moronism translated to English.

Yet we dont understand A.Egyptians.

As one Egyptologists on death bed said: "We know all about their(Egyptian) religion yet know nothing of their soul."

...

Edit: Also history is connected to geography a lot.

Egypt was unique due their position.

Assyrians were par excellence army.

But their position made them different from others.

Its like similarites between Japan and UK even they are very distant but they have had similarities due their region.

Edited May 14, 2013 by the L

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Now I must study for exams.

[The_Spartan]

Because I know that you (harte) have ego and that you are tactican and strategist I know you will hit harder at weakest point of my earlier post.

Never knew that posts had balls!

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Let us not assume that everything left from Ancient Egypt (or Sumer, for that matter) has been found.

The claim that an association is logical is not a claim that it is true.

On this I agree. Except its logic. Its hypothesis.

But its interesting that when you need you use "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument.

Never knew that posts had balls!

Because I can understand Harte without noise. (communication term)

[Harte]

Harte,

Mario Liverani found black mummy in Lybia dating 3500BC and its done as later Egyptians done theirs.

Interesting. Do you have a link?

R. A. Schwaller de Lubicz

'Le Temple de Karnak' Unpublished paper

The image is neither a rebus nor a cryptogram, it speaks simply as the evocation of an intuition. This can not in any case be transcribed into words without danger of leading to a concrete notion, be it an object, or a mental abstraction which may disguise the original intention. When, for example, we take for the word horizon' the apparent line separating the land (or sea) from the sky, this visible line is an abstraction, for it is only an appearance; it has no material reality. But in formulating the notion by the word 'horizon' we mentally see this line; we are obliged to see it or the word would make no sense to us. By contrast, the Egyptians represented the horizon by the image of the sky between two mountains —thereby evoking the moment of the sun's appearance rising out of the darkness of the morning and returning in the evening. This is a function, a vital state. The sign 'horizon' as image is positive, concrete; there is nothing abstract or conventional about it. But what it evokes is an 'intuition', that of the function of 'becoming', of Being emerging from nothingness. For it would again be reasoning, hence concretisation of the intuition were it said: 'the sun was merely concealed from view....

Therefore, when Champollion and the philologists after him declare that the ancients made use of certain images to stand for abstractions, this does not exactly accord with the mode of pharaonic thought, which is concerned with the evocation of intuitions that, for us, are abstractions, but to the ancients were 'states of Being.

Not a word above disagrees in the least with the article I linked or anything I've posted here.

Who is fringies?

Walter Bryan Emery?

Let see.

Walter Bryan Emery (2 July 1902 – 11 March 1971)[1] was a British Egyptologist born in Liverpool, England....Diplomatic Service at Cairo in Egypt, his entire life was devoted to the excavation of archaeological sites along the Nile Valley.[3]

After preliminary training at the Liverpool Institute of Archaeology, he went to Egypt for the first time as an assistant on the staff of the Egyptian Exploration Society expedition in 1923. There he aided in the excavation of Amarna (the ancient city in Middle Egypt founded by the pharaoh Akhenaton).[3]

By 1924, he was already Field Director of Sir Robert Mond's excavations at Thebes for the University of Liverpool. He made several clearings, restorations and protective operations into a score of tombs at Sheikh Abd el-Gurnah. Between 1924 and 1928, continuing as Director of the Mond Expedition, he worked on excavations at Nubia, Luxor and Thebes.[4]

In 1929 he was appointed Field Director of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia under the auspices of the Egyptian Government Service of Antiquities, with authority to explore and excavate all ancient sites in Nubia which were soon to be flooded after the erection of the Aswan Dam.[5] Working at Quban, Ballana and Qustul, he excavated the mysterious X group of tombs dating to the 3rd to 6th century A.D. He was assisted in his work by his wife, Molly.[4] The completion of the excavations of the fortress at Buhen ended his work in Nubia.[3]

He then became director of fieldwork at Luxor and Armant. During the years 1935 to 1939 he was the director of the Archaeological Survey of Nubia. During these years as director, Emery also investigated several early dynastic tombs at Saqqara. While at Saqqara he made the significant discovery of a "zoo" of mummified animal remains.

Following the years of interruption by the war and his service as a diplomat, Emery worked in the Sudan (Buhen, Qasr Ibrim). In 1964, he returned once more to Saqqara where he discovered the "enclosure of the sacred animals".[5] In 1970 the discovery was announced of a "mausoleum of the sacred cow," one of the most important finds in the annals of Egyptology.[3]

Emery obtained the Chair of Egyptology at University College London in 1951, and was a professor of Egyptology in London from 1951 to 1970.[4] He was elected to the British Academy Fellowship in 1959. His principal publications are Great tombs of the 1st dynasty, (3 volumes) 1949-58; Archaic Egypt, 1961; and Egypt in Nubia, 1965.[6]

Emery died in March 1971.

Bibliography [edit]

Emery published a number of works, including:

1938 The Tomb of Hemaka, Cairo

1939 Hor-aha, Cairo

1949 Great Tombs of the First Dynasty I, Cairo

1954 Great Tombs of the First Dynasty II, London

1958 Great Tombs of the First Dyansty III, London

1961 Archaic Egypt, Edinburgh

1962 A Funerary Repast in an Egyptian Tomb of the Archaic Period, Leiden

Good for him. Where does he state that hieroglyphic characters didn't originate in Egypt?

or

Georges Posener?

Georges Posener (born September 12, 1906 in Paris, died May 15, 1988) is a French Egyptologist.

A graduate of the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, section IV in 1933, he was a resident of the French Institute of Oriental Archaeology in Cairo from 1931 to 1935 and special advisor to the institute until the Second World War. At the end of it, he was appointed Director of Studies at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, until 1978, while a professor at the Collège de France from 1961 to 1978 professor of philology and Egyptian archeology.

Since 1969 he is a member of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-lettres.

And this reference claims that the characters didn't originate in Egypt?

Again, do you have a link to this hypothesis?

Or should I trust some Denise and e mag article?

"Trust" for what? Where do your references differ from the article I linked?

No one claim that.

Glad to here it. I apologize if you weren't about to take your claim down that path. Please understand that I've been down that road a hundred times - with hieroglyphs and a million other things coming from "an island in the West..."

I connect more logical things then Denise, e magazine and you.

Which is that hieroglyphs appears around same time as mace in Egypt.

Mace didnt exist in any cultures before Egyptian civilization rise.

Early maces appeared over 14,000 years ago in (I believe) the Ukraine.

Sorry, but trade between cultures has already been established. In fact, it's an important part of the article I linked. Trade introduces new things into cultures (obviously.)

So, in what way does the importation of a mace differ from the importation of the accounting method used by Sumer, with home-grown characters?

Rebus or not they (sumerian and ae script) are nothing similar.

Turns out they are fairly similar in concept. The huge difference in the characters is the point, really.

Maybe you don't know this, but many other written forms are not in the least styled as rebuses.

The earliest examples we have of ther Egyptian characters are not documents, again, they are tags. This is not to say that documents didn't exist, though. It's a problem. Papyrus and skins etc don't last. The Egyptians did adopt the cylinder seal from Sumer, so some other early stuff survives. Cuneiform, on the other hand, can survive the ages reasonably well.

You dont need to be that smart. As Champollion stressed out, lesser you try to understand hieroglyphs you get better results. Its symbolism. Yet try to understand cuneiform. And push hard. You ll see difference.

To conclude. I will belive to two well known Egyptologists and my gut then Denise and Harte. Sorry.

Believe what you want, as long as you leave out the "Island in the West..." bull crap.

Harte

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Here is the link Harte. I gave you wrong name of person who find it. But I was 100% sure that Mario Liverani discovered mummies in Lybia older then Egyptian ones.

I must check that again. Maybe my memory start to betrayed me.

http://www.time.com/...,865145,00.html

http://en.wikipedia....i/Uan_Muhuggiag

Those Egyptologists I quoted not saying that Egyptian hieroglyphs originate or not originate from AE but that they appeared suddenly.

Same as mace. Ancient ukrainians or not it is a FACT that mace also appeared suddenly in Egypt about time as hieroglyphs and mighty architecture.

When I think on AE I thnik on their architecture and their hieroglyphs with lots of birds. Its kind of interesting that (most of them) Egyptologists agree that mace, hieroglyphs appears suddenly.

On that fact you can conclude many things.

You ask for link for that hypothesis. And its not hypothesis its theory. Also I provide you source. You can see author, in which book and on what page. If you need more asistance be free to ask. You dont need to apologize. I understand that you see all rest of us, who isnt hard core sceptic as you, same.

Because I belive in some on border of science theories doesnt mean that I will believe in anything.

Im not suggesting island in the west or Atlantis. Just that many things about AE we dont understand.

Same as Egyptologists argued about old Egyptian statue find in Central Africa for example.

And I agree trade introduce new things into culture, Same as you suggest that mace was imported so the hieroglyphs might have.

Also I will add that trade cause specialization and specialization cause efficency. And efficency cause many things but most important, wealth and efficent use of resources which lead to baby boom oftenly then often follow decline.

We both think that hieroglyphs are imported, obviusly, just we dont agree from where. I dont know from where but to me Sumeria isnt source.

True I dont know nothing about rebus and scripts but I have eyes. If those Egyptians birds remind you on lines, many lines, then there might realy be case that script originate from Sumeria. But to me birds are nothing like lines.

Cuneiform did survive but we dont have clue in what extent since Sumerians, Akkadians, Babylonians, Elamites, Assyrians also use wax tablets.

L.

Edited May 18, 2013 by the L

[Big Bad Voodoo]

http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/21/the-six-thousand-year-old-mummies-from-takarkori-libya/

[Harte]

Here is the link Harte. I gave you wrong name of person who find it. But I was 100% sure that Mario Liverani discovered mummies in Lybia older then Egyptian ones.

I must check that again. Maybe my memory start to betrayed me.

http://www.time.com/...,865145,00.html

http://en.wikipedia....i/Uan_Muhuggiag

Like I said, I've not looked much at mummification.

It appears that the above mummy was the oldest ever found; at the time it was found it was far older than any Egyptian mummy, at about 5,000 years old. If I'm reading correctly.

Since then, comparable mummies (at least one, anyway,) have been found in Egypt as well: Link

There existed a culture then and well before then that occupied pretty much all of North Africa. This culture ended with climate change turning the savannah into the Sahara. When that happened, an buttload of them moved to the Nile Valley.

Those Egyptologists I quoted not saying that Egyptian hieroglyphs originate or not originate from AE but that they appeared suddenly.

Appearing suddenly in the historical record is not exactly the same as appearing suddenly in Ancient Egypt.

The fact that we've simply not found evidence of the development of these glyphs yet does not mean nobody ever will.

The media used for writing matters as well. You can't find proto-writng very easily if it was all written on papyrus-like materials.

Same as mace. Ancient ukrainians or not it is a FACT that mace also appeared suddenly in Egypt about time as hieroglyphs and mighty architecture.

The earliest known Egyptian maces were disc-shaped, and were soon improved upon thereafter. If the mace was introduced suddenly, there should be some of these disc-shaped maces somewhere else. Maybe somebody will find something like this, but so far no one has.

You ask for link for that hypothesis. And its not hypothesis its theory. Also I provide you source. You can see author, in which book and on what page. If you need more asistance be free to ask. You dont need to apologize. I understand that you see all rest of us, who isnt hard core sceptic as you, same.

Because I belive in some on border of science theories doesnt mean that I will believe in anything.

Im not suggesting island in the west or Atlantis. Just that many things about AE we dont understand.

We can agree that we don't know everything. And the older it is, the less we know.

We both think that hieroglyphs are imported, obviusly, just we dont agree from where. I dont know from where but to me Sumeria isnt source.

True I dont know nothing about rebus and scripts but I have eyes. If those Egyptians birds remind you on lines, many lines, then there might realy be case that script originate from Sumeria. But to me birds are nothing like lines.

I believe that the idea and method for turning speech into writing might have come from Sumer, not the glyphs themselves, which are different enough from any other writing characters we've found to indicate they originated in the area where they are found - Egypt, in other words.

Harte

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Harte from your link:

This means the Uan Muhuggiag mummy only predates the Egyptian mummification process by about 500 years.

Only is 500 years. Only. Then USA exist less then only. Mongolian empire is less then only. 500 years is a lot when we talk about civilizations, cultures.

In geological and cosmical scale is less then blink. But we dont talk about geology or cosmology.

Harte imagine what would you say on this:

The fact that weve simply not found Atlantis yet does not mean nobody ever will.

Lets stick to what we have. Fact that AE are unique is beside their geography is that they have left much more then rest of civilizations. So ...

Since AE were able to carved granite and diorite from pre dynastic times Im quite sure that they would carved some hieroglyphs on some artifcat or building.

None culture in Egypt ever used mace then mace appears as common thing as part of elites. Thats suddenly.

You just can believe that AE invented their hieroglyphs. You cant be sure.

Edited May 18, 2013 by the L

[cormac mac airt]

Harte from your link:

This means the Uan Muhuggiag mummy only predates the Egyptian mummification process by about 500 years.

Only is 500 years. Only. Then USA exist less then only. Mongolian empire is less then only. 500 years is a lot when we talk about civilizations, cultures.

In geological and cosmical scale is less then blink. But we dont talk about geology or cosmology.

Harte imagine what would you say on this:

The fact that weve simply not found Atlantis yet does not mean nobody ever will.

Lets stick to what we have. Fact that AE are unique is beside their geography is that they have left much more then rest of civilizations. So ...

Since AE were able to carved granite and diorite from pre dynastic times Im quite sure that they would carved some hieroglyphs on some artifcat or building.

None culture in Egypt ever used mace then mace appears as common thing as part of elites. Thats suddenly.

You just can believe that AE invented their hieroglyphs. You cant be sure.

While Harte may have been going with the main date from his link in acquiring the 500 year figure, it actually says at the bottom of same:

“Some bodies were found at a site called Hierakonpolis in the southern part of the Nile Valley. They show signs of mummification with resin and linen and they go back to around 3400 BC,” the assistant keeper in the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan told BBC News Online.

So while the evidence for someone being mummified and placed in a coffin within a tomb may be different by 500 years, actual remains that have gone through the mummification process in general are only 100 years younger than the Uan Muhuggiag Boy. Considering what's still unknown about pre-dynastic/early dynastic Egypt, that is practically contemporary.

cormac

[Big Bad Voodoo]

So while the evidence for someone being mummified and placed in a coffin within a tomb may be different by 500 years, actual remains that have gone through the mummification process in general are only 100 years younger than the Uan Muhuggiag Boy. Considering what's still unknown about pre-dynastic/early dynastic Egypt, that is practically contemporary.

cormac

So what is you saying, that they were spontaneous separate inventions?

[cormac mac airt]

So what is you saying, that they were spontaneous separate inventions?

No, I'm saying you're making too much of a big deal about the 500 year figure. Much of the early mummification process, based on the available evidence, was utilized across a large area of North Africa during the middle of the 4th millenium BC. This does not position one place over the other as an origin point for the development of mummification. Nor should it be seen as doing so, IMO. Particularly since what we know is based on two areas, Uan Muhuggiag and Hierakonpolis, being 1370 miles apart (point to point).

cormac

[Big Bad Voodoo]

cormac are you aware where were we in 1513? Do you know how many history events happened in between? Im not making too much a big deal.

Especially in the contest we discuss.

[cormac mac airt]

cormac are you aware where were we in 1513? Do you know how many history events happened in between? Im not making too much a big deal.

Especially in the contest we discuss.

Who's "we"? My ancestors were in Northwest Europe at the time with the earliest having come to America in 1610. I'm well aware of much of what they went through in that 97 year period from your date to mine. There wasn't a whole lot of change in that short span of time.

cormac

[Big Bad Voodoo]

There wasn't a whole lot of change in that short span of time.

cormac

I start to think that saying "Every sign of potence in one area is sign of impotence in another area" is true.

With all your great knowledge in ancient world you then show minor or no knowledge at all in other periods of history.

Edited May 18, 2013 by the L

[Big Bad Voodoo]

We as h.s.s.

[cormac mac airt]

I start to think that saying "Every potence is sign of other impotence" is true.

With all your great knowledge in ancient world you then show minor or no knowledge at all in other periods of history.

Can you show evidence of anything similar to the first occurances of mummification happening at two points 1370 miles apart, between 1513 and 1610. Because if you can't, you really have no point.

cormac

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Can you show evidence of anything similar to the first occurances of mummification happening at two points 1370 miles apart, between 1513 and 1610. Because if you can't, you really have no point.

cormac

I dont need anything similar. I dont need analogy. Its you have different perception of time because it happend in distant past.

100 years will always be 100 years.

But time is relative as Einstein said. Spending hour on UM is like minute. While Im with some boring meeting one minute seems like hour.

So in that sense I understand that we have different concept of times.

In 10 years you could walk from Egypt to Lybia and back.

[cormac mac airt]

I dont need anything similar. I dont need analogy. Its you have different perception of time because it happend in distant past.

100 years will always be 100 years.

But time is relative as Einstein said. Spending hour on UM is like minute. While Im with some boring meeting one minute seems like hour.

So in that sense I understand that we have different concept of times.

In 10 years you could walk from Egypt to Lybia and back.

In other words you've got nothing. Okay, glad we got that settled.

cormac

[Big Bad Voodoo]

In other words you've got nothing. Okay, glad we got that settled.

cormac

Your interpretation is wrong. Read agian. But this time pay attention.

100 years will always be 100 years.

Edited May 19, 2013 by the L

[Big Bad Voodoo]

cormac I thought always that you was stricked for details. Obviously I was wrong.

You can enjoy in your utopia that mummification start in Egypt.

Now... I m glad that we got that settled.

Edited May 19, 2013 by the L

[cormac mac airt]

cormac I thought always that you was stricked for details. Obviously I was wrong.

You can enjoy in your utopia that mummification start in Egypt.

Now... I m glad that we got that settled.

Evidently you didn't understand what I said, to whit:

This does not position one place over the other as an origin point for the development of mummification.

Which means I never stated mummification started in Egypt. But then again, you've not shown that it originated in Libya either. That you want 100 years and 1370+ miles distance to be more than it is is totally beside the point.

cormac

[outoftheordinary88]

there was a documentary i saw not to long ago debating over the age of the egyptians it seemed that the sphynx was under water once when there was a lake in that part of egypt the debate was that the lake was there way before the hystory tells us egyptians excisted my theory is yes the body might be older then egyptians but they built the head in their time therefore the head looks dissportionate because it was built at a later time in history

[Big Bad Voodoo]

Evidently you didn't understand what I said, to whit:

Which means I never stated mummification started in Egypt. But then again, you've not shown that it originated in Libya either. That you want 100 years and 1370+ miles distance to be more than it is is totally beside the point.

cormac

True I never showed because I dont know where were borders of pre dynastic Egypt. Maybe same peole in Lybia lived in Egypt.

But what I silently and secretly suggest is that maybe it was like Roman empire. After they declined in west, east rises.

If its not the same people then I think I prove point that mummies originiate outside from Egypt.

Also that all doesnt change fact that hieroglyphs and mace appears suddenly.