Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Who were the Phoenicians?


  • Please log in to reply
187 replies to this topic

#61    legionromanes

legionromanes

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008

Posted 20 October 2008 - 04:24 PM

OldTimeRadio on Oct 20 2008, 03:48 AM, said:

The fact that the Turin Papyrus and the Sumeriam king lists both postulate history back to nearly 40,000 years ago is a least worth noting. It may ultimately mean or prove nothing, but it's still interesting.

     As for Herodotus, his greatness lies not in his errors (which were always intelligent ones, such as his quite reasoned but erroneous theories as to the origins of the annual flooding of the Nile) but for the things he got right.

     It's a little like Pliny the Elder theorizing that the Sun is six million miles from the Earth, in opposition to the  commonly-held view of his contemporaries that it is a mere 200 miles distant. (And some believed only 20!) Do we condemn Pliny for his ignorance or praise him for bringing us exponentially closer to the truth?

the turin papyrus is a geological map drawn in 1160 BC by the well-known Scribe-of-the-Tomb Amennakhte, son of Ipuy for a geological expedition for Ramses IV, as such it makes no mention of dates at all.

the sumerian king list goes back as far as about 3500bce.

perhaps you'd like to check your facts and get back to us

wink2.gif




#62    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    Lector Historiae

  • Member
  • 8,766 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 20 October 2008 - 04:44 PM

legionromanes on Oct 20 2008, 12:17 PM, said:

right so how do you explain the discrepancy between what the science says here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_bay#Age

and what it says here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonecian#Imp...es_and_colonies
80,000bce Carolina bays formed
1000bce first appearence of the phonecian empire
so youre about 79,000 years out of date but sure whats 79,000 years when you have an agenda to spread disinformation.
also is there any scientific evidence for massive Tsunamis and earthquakes around 80,000bce that supports your claims because from where I'm standing you appear to have fabricated much of your post with the aid of your imagination and very little else


wink2.gif


Legion -- if you get Orion to respond to this, you'll have done better than me! (Also, the data suggests that these formations took centuries or even millennia to form; they were not the action of one, single event!)

--Jaylemurph

edit: spelling

Edited by jaylemurph, 20 October 2008 - 04:44 PM.

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#63    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,911 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 20 October 2008 - 04:52 PM

Leonardo on Oct 20 2008, 07:19 AM, said:

source. My emphasis.

I will try to find out more about these monuments and the Kafiti they refer to. The Abydos ships, btw, aren't specifically dated to Aha's reign, but are thought to date back to the early first dynasty. However the range of dates these ships may hail from is 2950 - 2775 BCE.


According to Henry Crittenden Morris in his book "The History of Colonization from the Earliest Times to the Present Day" :

"The Egyptians called all the tribes whom they met 'Kafiti' or 'Kefatiu,' which term was originally used only "...for the people of the seacoasts, more especially of the regions occupied later by the Phoenicians" (Maspero, "Struggle of the Nations," 120)"

The above is from a footnote found on THIS PAGE of Crittenden's tome.

If anyone noticed, yes the term Kefatiu does refer to the occupants of Keftiu, which these days appears to be more and more in reference to Crete, though as Crittenden states, the Egyptians called many people Kafiti (or Kefatiu/Keftiu.)  In Crittenden's day, Keftiu was considered to be Cyprus, though there remains some argument which it is (or even whether it's either one or even both) to this day.

Lastly there's little doubt that the Phoenicians owe little or nothing of their sailing skill to Egypt.  The Egyptians were lousy sailors while the Phoenecians excelled to such an extent that the Egyptians hired them to transport their goods and to provide transport for their royals and explorers.

Ask Herodotus!  rolleyes.gif

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#64    legionromanes

legionromanes

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:00 PM

well if he doesn't respond or start producing evidence then he should be banned as a deliberate misinformer shouldn't he.


wink2.gif


#65    Orion von Koch

Orion von Koch

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,096 posts
  • Joined:19 Jul 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:02 PM

legionromanes on Oct 20 2008, 11:17 AM, said:

right so how do you explain the discrepancy between what the science says here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolina_bay#Age

and what it says here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonecian#Imp...es_and_colonies
80,000bce Carolina bays formed
1000bce first appearence of the phonecian empire
so youre about 79,000 years out of date but sure whats 79,000 years when you have an agenda to spread disinformation.
also is there any scientific evidence for massive Tsunamis and earthquakes around 80,000bce that supports your claims because from where I'm standing you appear to have fabricated much of your post with the aid of your imagination and very little else


wink2.gif


Wake Up.  http://www.pnas.org/content/104/41/16016.full



#66    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    Lector Historiae

  • Member
  • 8,766 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:02 PM

legionromanes on Oct 20 2008, 01:00 PM, said:

well if he doesn't respond or start producing evidence then he should be banned as a deliberate misinformer shouldn't he.


wink2.gif


Oh, I wouldn't go that far. I'd say publicly mocked, but he is already!

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#67    legionromanes

legionromanes

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:06 PM

jaylemurph on Oct 20 2008, 06:02 PM, said:

Oh, I wouldn't go that far. I'd say publicly mocked, but he is already!

--Jaylemurph


he breaches at least two rules every time he posts

Quote

2d. Accuracy: Do not post material that is knowingly or intentionally false, inaccurate or misleading.
  
2e. Garbage posting: Do not deliberately make posts of little worth or that contain nonsense, this includes making numerous short non-constructive posts designed to quickly inflate your post count or to annoy other members.

why is this allowed to happen, is this place ok with allowing someone to blatantly breach the rules with every post?

wink2.gif






#68    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,911 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:27 PM

legionromanes on Oct 20 2008, 12:06 PM, said:

he breaches at least two rules every time he posts

why is this allowed to happen, is this place ok with allowing someone to blatantly breach the rules with every post?

wink2.gif


Apparently, his posts haven't been "reported" to admins.

While I agree with you that he is deliberately spreading lies about practically everything on which he opines, the fact is he's putting forth an opinion (though he should state this more often and stop acting like he "knows" something we do not) and thus is probably covered re the rules violations.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#69    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,039 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:31 PM

Orion von Koch on Oct 20 2008, 06:02 PM, said:



Wake up yourself, Orion.

Quote

Just as close scrutiny of the Holocene impacts belies an extraterrestrial source, an impact on the southeastern Laurentide ice sheet at 12.9 ka proposed at the 2007 American Geophysical Union Joint Assembly (Firestone et al., 2007a, 2007b) engenders similar doubts. This purported impact is cited as a trigger for the Younger Dryas climate event, extinction of Pleistocene mega-fauna, demise of the Clovis culture, the dawn of agriculture, and other events (Firestone et al., 2007a, 2007b). Evidence of the 12.9-ka impact includes magnetic grains, microspherules, iridium, glass-like carbon, carbonaceous deposits draped over mammoth bones, fullerenes enriched in 3He (Becker et al., 2007), and micron-scale “nanodiamonds” (Firestone et al., 2007c). We suggest that the data are not consistent with the 4–5-km-diameter impactor that has been proposed, but rather with the constant and certainly noncatastrophic rain of sand-sized micrometeorites into Earth's atmosphere.

The 12.9-ka impact story has struggled to bring its disparate evidence under a single umbrella. The impact story originated in Firestone and Topping (2001) and the Firestone et al. (2006) book, both of which contain observations and claims so wild that other work by these authors invites careful scrutiny. The nature of the 12.9-ka event changes radically with each iteration, from a supernova-generated “cosmic ray jet” (Firestone et al., 2006) to a massive atmospheric airburst (Firestone et al., 2007a, 2007b) to “multiple ET airbursts along with surface impacts” (Firestone et al., 2007c). Airbursts are a convenient explanation, given the lack of an impact crater, tektites, shocked quartz, or high-pressure minerals. Airburst events are associated with small impactors, perhaps <160 m diameter (e.g., Chapman and Morrison, 1994). Furthermore, the 12.9-ka event is identified as an oblique strike with “high-speed projectile material” (Firestone et al., 2007a) creating the elliptical “Carolina Bays” of the southeastern United States. Yet, of all impacts in the solar system, only a handful represent strikes capable of generating visibly elliptical forms (Pierazzo and Melosh, 2000). No meteorite material has ever previously been recovered from the Carolina Bays. Firestone and colleagues return to an impact origin for the Bays, ignoring a half-century of mainstream research focused on geomorphic mechanisms and age control documenting formation over extended time (Grant et al., 1998; Ivester et al., 2007). Similar elliptical depressions in Argentina, once claimed as an oblique impact swarm, were recently debunked and are now recognized as eolian (Bland et al., 2002).

The 12.9-ka impact story also has struggled with the broad range of impact-related materials reported. Firestone and Topping (2001) identified chondrules, suggesting that the impactor was a chondrite. Magnetic grains and spherules (Firestone et al., 2007a, 2007b, 2007c) are consistent with an iron-rich meteoroid, whereas silicate material (Firestone et al., 2007c) suggests a stony meteoroid, and “glass-like carbon” and carbon spherules suggest a carbonaceous source. Firestone et al. (2006, 2007a) suggest geochemical affinities with lunar crustal material. Any one of these might be a credible extraterrestrial source, but together they are a Frankenstein monster, incompatible with any single impactor or any known impact event.

In actuality, almost all of the material reported at 12.9 ka is ubiquitous throughout the geological record. Glassy and metallic spherules are found in Antarctic ice (e.g., Taylor et al., 1998), in deep-sea sediments (e.g., Petterson and Fredriksson, 1958), and in peat bogs (e.g., Franzén, 2006). This material results from the steady rain of micrometeorites through the atmosphere, the majority ablating and settling to the surface as dust. Glassy spherules also derive from numerous anthropogenic processes and products. In addition, both anthropogenic combustion and natural wildfires produce both glassy and carbon spherular forms (Franzén, 2006) (Fig. DR2 [see text footnote one]).


source

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#70    legionromanes

legionromanes

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,453 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:35 PM

Orion von Koch on Oct 20 2008, 06:02 PM, said:



your link doesn't contain any references to phonecians, so imo you just deliberately posted garbage and I have reported you for doing so, in future at least attempt to back up your spurious claims or just stop wasting everyones time by making them in the first place.

btw you may be interested to know that firestones hypothesis has been debunked and that the formation of the carolina bays as I already told you dates back to 80,000 years ago and the idea that it was formed by an astronomical event has been completely discounted

Quote

An old theory about Bays is that they were formed by astronomical impacts---when you look at the elliptical nature of the Bays (craters?), this appears to be a good theory. Surely the ellipticity would indicate a sloping trajectory of the incoming object? However, this theory can be rapidly discounted for several reasons:

Astronomical impacts involve supersonic collisions. Supersonic releases of energy spread out from the point of impact symmetrically, and excavate circular craters. Look at photographs of the moon---it is covered with circular craters, and not elliptical ones.

Arguing that the impact was nonsupersonic would be completely unprecedented. Even the sluggish space shuttle travels at supersonic speeds. To suggest an astronomical object would strike the Earth at subsonic speeds would be so improbable as to be laughable.

Searches for meteoric material in and around Bays have all been unsuccessful.

The Tungusta blast (probably a cometary chunk) of 1908 left no meteoric material, but it also did not create any kind of crater.

Hybrid hypotheses (an impact from loose aggregates of quasi-cometary/asteroids) represent bad science, as such things have never been observed. One is simply positing an unknown entity, to explain an unexplained observation. Also, you still have the unresolved problem of supersonic collisions creating circular craters, not elliptical ones.

Any explanation of an extremely unlikely, unprecedented cratering event in the Carolinas would have to invoke the same unlikely astronomical event in Delaware. TWO unlikely events, not just one!

so I suggest that you take your own advice and wake up and actually find out what science is saying before you claim science is wrong again because every time you've said that so far you just sound like a woo woo

wink2.gif


#71    Leonardo

Leonardo

    Awake

  • Member
  • 15,039 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Hell is a guilty conscience

Posted 20 October 2008 - 05:54 PM

Harte on Oct 20 2008, 05:52 PM, said:

According to Henry Crittenden Morris in his book "The History of Colonization from the Earliest Times to the Present Day" :

"The Egyptians called all the tribes whom they met 'Kafiti' or 'Kefatiu,' which term was originally used only "...for the people of the seacoasts, more especially of the regions occupied later by the Phoenicians" (Maspero, "Struggle of the Nations," 120)"

The above is from a footnote found on THIS PAGE of Crittenden's tome.

If anyone noticed, yes the term Kefatiu does refer to the occupants of Keftiu, which these days appears to be more and more in reference to Crete, though as Crittenden states, the Egyptians called many people Kafiti (or Kefatiu/Keftiu.)  In Crittenden's day, Keftiu was considered to be Cyprus, though there remains some argument which it is (or even whether it's either one or even both) to this day.

Lastly there's little doubt that the Phoenicians owe little or nothing of their sailing skill to Egypt.  The Egyptians were lousy sailors while the Phoenecians excelled to such an extent that the Egyptians hired them to transport their goods and to provide transport for their royals and explorers.

Ask Herodotus!  rolleyes.gif

Harte


Thanks for the info, Harte. I'm aware the source I quoted doesn't say the Kafiti mentioned were Phoenician (or proto-Phoenician) but it is a possibility. I am only trying to make Puzz aware that she shouldn't be so definitive in her statements/theories when the evidence is so ambiguous.

In the book of life, the answers aren't in the back. - Charlie Brown

"It is a profound and necessary truth that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them."  - J. Robert Oppenheimer; Scientific Director; The Manhattan Project

"talking bull**** is not a victimless crime" - Marina Hyde, author.

#72    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    Lector Historiae

  • Member
  • 8,766 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 20 October 2008 - 06:47 PM

legionromanes on Oct 20 2008, 01:35 PM, said:

your link doesn't contain any references to phonecians, so imo you just deliberately posted garbage and I have reported you for doing so, in future at least attempt to back up your spurious claims or just stop wasting everyones time by making them in the first place.

btw you may be interested to know that firestones hypothesis has been debunked and that the formation of the carolina bays as I already told you dates back to 80,000 years ago and the idea that it was formed by an astronomical event has been completely discounted

so I suggest that you take your own advice and wake up and actually find out what science is saying before you claim science is wrong again because every time you've said that so far you just sound like a woo woo

wink2.gif


Damn. And I get (undeserved) flak for being mean! Looks like Orion's going to have to make up a whole new level of stupid for Legion to occupy.

"Blather on and watch!"

--Jaylemurph



"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#73    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 8,911 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:18 PM

Leonardo on Oct 20 2008, 12:54 PM, said:

Thanks for the info, Harte. I'm aware the source I quoted doesn't say the Kafiti mentioned were Phoenician (or proto-Phoenician) but it is a possibility. I am only trying to make Puzz aware that she shouldn't be so definitive in her statements/theories when the evidence is so ambiguous.

Leo,

I was just trying to tell you about the Kafiti and my understanding of the relationship of that word with the words Keftiu and Kafatiu.

I came across it looking into Keftiu as Crete, part of the idea that Plato's Atlantis may have been based on Egyptian stories about Keftiu and what happened there (Crete at the time of the Thera eruption.)

Never thought I'd use it for anything else, but...

Of course, this is old stuff and may well be completely out of date.  Hopefully Kmt_Sesh will come along and straighten me out.

What I mean to say is that, apparently, there's no real point into going any further into any research of the Kafiti since the term appears to have been an Egyptian catch-all phrase for peoples living all along the coast of the Med.


Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#74    AzTide

AzTide

    In The Witness Protection Program

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,682 posts
  • Joined:17 Aug 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arizona

  • Boy, I got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals.

Posted 21 October 2008 - 01:21 AM

jaylemurph on Oct 20 2008, 06:47 PM, said:

Damn. And I get (undeserved) flak for being mean! Looks like Orion's going to have to make up a whole new level of stupid for Legion to occupy.

"Blather on and watch!"

--Jaylemurph



Come on guys please cut Orion some slack. From what I've read in Orion’s posts it looks like he is just trying to prove to everyone that he takes serious learning at least one new word a day. And then prove that he's using it thru out the day to improve is vocabulary skills.

Wonder which rules did I violate with this post?   lol


“He who controls the present controls the past”  George Orwell

"It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world."  Thomas Jefferson

"For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." Stuart Chase

"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."  Thomas Jefferson

#75    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,414 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 21 October 2008 - 01:25 AM

Leonardo on Oct 21 2008, 03:54 AM, said:

Thanks for the info, Harte. I'm aware the source I quoted doesn't say the Kafiti mentioned were Phoenician (or proto-Phoenician) but it is a possibility. I am only trying to make Puzz aware that she shouldn't be so definitive in her statements/theories when the evidence is so ambiguous.

Hmmmm, 'a possibility'...
me, I shouldn't be so ambiguous....yeah OK, I can see this is going, nowhere, I am aware of Harte and his Keftui/Keftiu, whoever they were possibly being from Crete or wherever else they were in the Mediterranean. me....ambiguous...lol. The Phoenicians were known as Keben or Kepen.
So again I will state that 'it is my opinion' that Egypt had sea faring boats first and then lost thier supremity, we see better Egyptian boats built around:

Quote

In 1991 in the desert near the temple of Khentyamentiu, archaeologists uncovered the remains of 14 ships dating back to the early first dynasty (2950-2775 BC), possibly associated with King Aha, the first ruler of that dynasty. These 75 foot long ships are buried side by side and have wooden hulls, rough stone boulders which were used as anchors, and "sewn" wooden planks. Also found within their desert graves were remains of the woven straps that joined the planks, as well as reed bundles that were used to seal seams between planks. The Abydos ships have the honor of being the world’s oldest planked boats. The ancient Egyptians were creating ships with technological skills far beyond their time, well before the invention of the wheel.

than later in time. Phoenicians came along and overtook them in seafaring skills. I am aware Necho got Phoenicians to sail around Africa. By that time Egypt didn't sail much anymore but the evidence is overwhelming they sailed to Byblos in the 4th millenium.

Quote

The famous Royal Ship of King Cheops (fourth dynasty ruler of the Old Kingdom), more formally known as Khufu, is a perfect example of a papyriform boat. Discovered around 1954, the Royal Ship is still considered to be one of the world’s most outstanding archaeological artifacts. The ancient boat had been dismantled into 651 separate parts, and its nearly perfectly preserved timbers were found in 13 scrupulously arranged layers that were buried in a sealed boat pit which was carved into the Giza plateau’s limestone bedrock. It took years for the boat to be painstakingly reassembled, primarily by the Egyptian Department of Antiquities’ chief restorer, Ahmed Youssef Moustafa (later known as Hag Ahmed Youssef). Once completed, the Royal Ship measured approximately 150 feet in length. The timbers were made of Lebanese cedar while the pegs and other small parts were made from native acacias, sycamores and sidders.

Cedar was not new to the Egypt of Cheops' time - it had been found in predynastic graves, indicating to modern archaeologists that trade had occurred with Lebanon at least as far back as the end of the fourth millennium BC. Egyptians had what has been termed as an "emotional need" for trade with Lebanon because of that country’s large supply of the invaluable resinous woods and oils so necessary in Egyptian funerary customs. Trade with Lebanon had to be conducted over water, because the Egyptians had neither wheeled transportation nor heavy draft animals, and the brutal desert regions through which they would have had to travel hosted hostile tribes.


http://www.kingtutshop.com/freeinfo/egyptian-boats.htm


My main aim was to show that Byblos was at some time an Egyptian colony or at the very least had a trading colony there which my 3 credible Google books sites did show.
If I'm wrong on the boat thing it is not really a concern, I won't continue on the boats, I've shown my evidences, I still maintain Egyptians were in Byblos and helped the town become a bigger commerical centre therefore helping the Phoenicians become a greater 'Empire'. kmt will tell you that lower Palestine is as far as Egyptians got but I believe evidence shows otherwise unless Byblos is situated in lower Palestine, which I don't think it would be classed as since it's pretty northerly.

Edited by The Puzzler, 21 October 2008 - 02:03 AM.

In an mmm bop it's gone...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users