Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Sphinx
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Ancient Mysteries & Alternative History
Pages: 1, 2
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (crystal sage @ Oct 31 2007, 07:38 PM) *
It soooo makes me want to dig up my old copy of his book and reread it!!!!

grin2.gif cool.gif ...Now I'm off to search for it!!!!!

I just don't understand the fuss... the Scientologists have a similar belief do they not.. with their Thetans ....???

Do they get black balled???


they do if they're trying to do anything in germany
QUOTE
The German government considers the Scientology organization a commercial enterprise with a history of taking advantage of vulnerable individuals and an extreme dislike of any criticism. The government is also concerned that the organization's totalitarian structure and methods may pose a risk to Germany's democratic society. Several kinds of evidence have influenced this view of Scientology, including the organization's activities in the United States.

http://www.germany.info/relaunch/info/arch...cientology.html
like whats that word thats sounds like a famous greek doctor ?

laugh.gif




bee
Quotes from Robert Temple....

QUOTE
He himself says in 'The Sirius Mystery'....2nd edition...hardback...page 30...

"I think we could adopt an unbreakable rule:anyone who insists that what he says is true
is a phoney.
The only people to whom one should ever listen are those who suggest things
tentatively, as possibly true."


and

"I want to stress that everything in this book is hypothetical. I have never insisted on the truth
any of it."


I think that these words show that Temple is a reasonable individual.



QUOTE (Harte @ Oct 31 2007, 05:08 PM) *
[I doubt it's Anubis. But I admit it doesn't look very leonine either.

So, I'm open to the Sphinx being something besides a lion. As far as I know, if the sphinx is not a lion, it must be older than the ancient Egyptians since it's been referred to as a lion by the earliest reference to it we have.

If the AE's thought it was a lion, and they were wrong, then it's extremely unlikely that it is Anubis because they knew Anubis and they didn't call it Anubis.

As far as I know, Anubis doesn't predate the predynastic Egyptians, but somebody please correct me if I'm wrong here.


Ok....thanks for your relply...


QUOTE
But it doesn't matter. I mean, you're free to decide to give your money to thieves if you want. Previously you could say he'd fooled you. Now you can only say "I'm too stubborn and full of myself to admit that Temple ripped me off, so I'm gonna keep supporting him because if I don't I'll have to admit that he fooled me."


I think that his books are worth every penny I paid for them. I don't believe his intention was to fool
anyone.....see quotes from Temple himself above. And, for what it's worth I DO support him...when
someone uses a post I have done...to launch what amounts to a nasty, uncalled for attack.


QUOTE (jaylemurph @ Oct 31 2007, 05:53 PM) *
[I just wanted to throw out there that I don't think bee is full of herself. I might be inclined to say she has a higher level of sustained suspension of disbelief than I do, but that's only my opinion of my interpretation of facts, basically...


Thanks for that....

QUOTE
However, I quite agree with Harte that Temple is at best a liar and at worst conniving thief.


Now you've gone and spoilt it... tongue.gif .....see quotes from Temple at beginning of this post....


QUOTE (crystal sage @ Oct 31 2007, 07:38 PM) *
It soooo makes me want to dig up my old copy of his book and reread it!!!!

grin2.gif cool.gif ...Now I'm off to search for it!!!!!


Hi there.....the quote I did about the hassle he got from intelligence agencies makes one wonder
what exactly he delved into that 'got them going'.....it wasn't the sphinx/anubis speculations...because
this wasn't in the original 1976 edition......So what exactly was it?? happy.gif
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE
He himself says in 'The Sirius Mystery'....2nd edition...hardback...page 30...

"I think we could adopt an unbreakable rule:anyone who insists that what he says is true
is a phoney. The only people to whom one should ever listen are those who suggest things
tentatively, as possibly true."

and

"I want to stress that everything in this book is hypothetical. I have never insisted on the truth
any of it."

how can you possibly read the words of the author himself telling you that its a load of old blarney and still think its all true

this is actually a scene from Monty Python yanno

"only the true messiah would deny his divinity"
"oh what chance does that give me ok I am the messiah"
"he is the messiah he is the messiah"

wake up and smell the coffee



QUOTE (bee @ Oct 31 2007, 09:15 PM) *
Hi there.....the quote I did about the hassle he got from intelligence agencies makes one wonder
what exactly he delved into that 'got them going'.....it wasn't the sphinx/anubis speculations...because
this wasn't in the original 1976 edition......So what exactly was it?? happy.gif

the quote about the hassle from intelligence agencies is unsubstantiated rubbish
its also the usual technique for pseudohistorians

Zechariah Sitchin claims that Sumerologists are hiding the truth
Graham Hancock claims that Archaeologists are hiding the truth
David Hatcher childress claims that governments are hiding the truth
Robert Bauval claims that Egyptologists are hiding the truth
so Temple claims that Inteligence agencies are hiding something
Consipracy theorists claim its the new world order
Ufologists claim its the zeta reticulans
funnily enough if you took away these paranoid claims none of the bodies of work by any of these people stands up to the slightest scrutiny

if someone actually came up with something original then you'd have something.

but as its the same old rubbish we've heard a million times before and especially as you haven't even bothered to check the data yourself (like Temple) the value of your input is pretty worthless

thankyou for your participation

tongue.gif
bee
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Oct 31 2007, 11:03 PM) *
[the quote about the hassle from intelligence agencies is unsubstantiated rubbish


Really!.....and you know this because........?

QUOTE
its also the usual technique for pseudohistorians


I think that the techniques used by pseudo-sceptics are more pertinent at the moment.

QUOTE
the value of your input is pretty worthless


......if my 'input' is so worthless...why would you bother to reply...?

But this topic is about the sphinx....the subject of Robert Temple has come into it because
I brought up his speculation that the sphinx may be Anubis.......

It may be......it may not be....and Temple himself makes no claims to 'the truth'.

But his studies and speculations cause quite a stir. I wonder why this is?

jaylemurph
QUOTE (bee @ Oct 31 2007, 05:15 PM) *
Now you've gone and spoilt it... tongue.gif .....see quotes from Temple at beginning of this post....


I almost deserve that.

But I do think those quotes are him being disingenuous -- there are one too many instances of him using data that was clearly out of date or deliberately misinterpreted to think he was only making a good faith error. Sitchin may just be out of his mind enough (or just amazingly willfully ignorant enough) to think what he hocks is true, but folks like Temple and van Daniken /know/ what they're throwing out is malarkey and are in a whole different league.

--Jaylemurph
bee
QUOTE (jaylemurph @ Nov 1 2007, 12:00 AM) *
Sitchin may just be out of his mind enough (or just amazingly willfully ignorant enough) to think what he hocks is true, but folks like Temple and van Daniken /know/ what they're throwing out is malarkey and are in a whole different league.


Are you claiming to be a mind-reader?..... wink2.gif
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (bee @ Nov 1 2007, 12:28 AM) *
Are you claiming to be a mind-reader?..... wink2.gif

I thought he was claiming what the vast majority of people qualified to be able to tell you the truth are saying

thats apparently not you but it doesn't matter, progress is founded upon discovery, not fantasy
bee
Robert Temple has come up in this thread because of his speculation/studies that the sphinx
may not be a lion but possibly Anubis.

He writes in the revised edition about the attention he got from intelligence agencies....after
the first edition of his book 'The Sirius Mystery'....was published.

Some people, including a couple of members in this thread are very keen to ridicule and dismiss
Temple. They openly call him a liar. (and insult him in other ways)

I do not believe that he is a liar....and defending him earlier in this thread....I wondered what it
was that he was saying that could cause such a kefuffle....his speculations about the Sphinx?
As these speculations came in the revised edition....it must have been something else. But perhaps
the 'identity' of the Sphinx is also very sensitive??

Maybe the following might shead some light on the matter......

Pages 400/401 Appendix V111...revised edition...The Sirius Mystery...1998...hardback..
QUOTE...
.........." The most important Mason in my family from my point of view was my grandfather, who
was also called Robert Temple. He was a 32 degree mason and so highly respected in Masonry
that he was asked to become a 33 degree Mason, which is the highest degree possible(called a Grand
Inspector-General). This involves administration to the entire Movement in America as well as most of
the world from the base called The Supreme Council and Mother Supreme Council of the World........
.........however he had to decline this invitation because it takes up so much time and in those days
was also extremely expensive, and he had lost his money in the Great Depression. But he sponsored
into Freemasonry a young man whom he liked very much called Ted Webber. And Ted Webber went on
to become a very active and important 33 degree mason, and a close friend and colleague of the
Sovereign Grand Commander Henry Clausen, as well as of those other prominent 33 degree Masons,
President Gerald Ford and American Astronaut Colonel 'Buzz' Aldrin, who carried a Scottish Rite flag
to the Moon, emphasizing the interest the highest level of Freemasonry takes in the worlds
beyond our own.


So it was Charles E. ('Ted') Webber......who approached me about The Sirius Mystery.............
...........He said .........'We are very interested in your bookThe Sirius Mystery. We realise
you have written this without any knowledge of the traditions of Masonry, and you may not be aware
of this, but you have made some discoveries which relate to the most central Masonic
traditions at a high level, including some things that none of us ever knew
........................
.........................................I asked him what sort of connection there was and he did mention specifically
that it was my work on ancient Egypt, on Isis and Osiris, and the ancient traditions of the star
Sirius.
"


END OF QUOTE.

Once the genie is out of the bottle....it's hard to stuff it back in again....especially now there is the World
Wide Web.....so I surpose that ridicule and various accusations of dishonesty is one way of trying to
control 'the genie'.???

Is the speculation that the Shinx is Anubis a 'hot potato'?......I don't know....but hot or not....something
about Temple's work has, as I said earlier....caused a kefuffle... original.gif And maybe the above goes some way
to explain why???

Stixxman
while Temple MAY be doubted what cannot be doubted is the fact that he is attempting to improve or help our overall perception of the topic. MAybe its flights of fancy but it seems prettty lucid for that, and maybe it will aid in the overall study of the sphinx. If proven wrong it is not necessary to think it was all bad. At the least it would eliminate a theory and bring the conclusion closer.
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (Stixxman @ Nov 1 2007, 02:06 PM) *
while Temple MAY be doubted what cannot be doubted is the fact that he is attempting to improve or help our overall perception of the topic. MAybe its flights of fancy but it seems prettty lucid for that, and maybe it will aid in the overall study of the sphinx. If proven wrong it is not necessary to think it was all bad. At the least it would eliminate a theory and bring the conclusion closer.

How is telling lies for profit "attempting to improve or help our overall perception of the topic"

it doesn't need to be proven wrong, the Egyptians themselves put a tablet with the Sphinx actual name on it between its front paws
Its name is Harmarkhis of Rostar

as for Robert Temple as you were unable or unwilling to read the earlier post which completely and fairly debunked every one of his claims perhaps you could spare a minute or two to read this.
http://skepdic.com/dogon.html

QUOTE
Dogon and Sirius
The Dogon are a people of about 100,000 who dwell in western Africa. According to Robert Temple (The Sirius Mystery), the Dogon had contact with some ugly, amphibious* extraterrestrials, the Nommos, some 5,000 years ago. The aliens came here for some unknown reason from a planet orbiting Sirius some 8.6 light years from earth. The alleged visitors from outer space seem to have done little else than give the earthlings some useless astronomical information.

One of Temple's main pieces of evidence is the tribe's alleged knowledge of Sirius B, a companion to the star Sirius. The Dogon are supposed to have known that Sirius B orbits Sirius and that a complete orbit takes fifty years. One of the pieces of evidence Temple cites is a sand picture made by the Dogon to explain their beliefs. The diagram that Temple presents, however, is not the complete diagram that the Dogon showed to the French anthropologists Marcel Griaule and Germaine Dieterlen, who were the original sources for Temple's story. Temple has either misinterpreted Dogon beliefs, or distorted Griaule and Dieterlen's claims, to fit his fantastic story.

Griaule and Dieterlen describe a world renovation ceremony, associated with the bright star Sirius (sigu tolo, "star of Sigui"), called sigui, held by the Dogon every sixty years. According to Griaule and Dieterlen the Dogon also name a companion star, po tolo "Digitaria star" (Sirius cool.gif and describe its density and rotational characteristics. Griaule did not attempt to explain how the Dogon could know this about a star that cannot be seen without telescopes, and he made no claims about the antiquity of this information or of a connection with ancient Egypt.*

Temple lists a number of astronomical beliefs held by the Dogon that seem curious. They have a traditional belief in a heliocentric system and in elliptical orbits of astronomical phenomena. They seem to have knowledge of the satellites of Jupiter and rings of Saturn, among other things. Where did they get this knowledge, he asks, if not from extraterrestrial visitors? They don’t have telescopes or other scientific equipment, so how could they get this knowledge? Temple’s answer is that they got this information from amphibious aliens from outer space.

Afrocentrists, on the other hand, claimed that the Dogon could see Sirius B without the need of a telescope because of their special eyesight due to quantities of melanin (Welsing, F. C. 1987. "Lecture 1st Melanin Conference, San Francisco, September 16-17, 1987"). There is, of course, no evidence for this special eyesight, nor for other equally implausible notions such as the claim that the Dogon got their knowledge from black Egyptians who had telescopes.

a terrestrial source?

Carl Sagan agreed with Temple that the Dogon could not have acquired their knowledge without contact with an advanced technological civilization. Sagan suggests, however, that that civilization was terrestrial rather than extraterrestrial. Perhaps the source was Temple himself and his loose speculations on what he learned from Griaule, who based his account on an interview with one person, Ambara, and an interpreter.

According to Sagan, western Africa has had many visitors from technological societies located on planet earth. The Dogon have a traditional interest in the sky and astronomical phenomena. If a European had visited the Dogon in the 1920's and 1930's, conversation would likely have turned to astronomical matters, including Sirius, the brightest star in the sky and the center of Dogon mythology. Furthermore, there had been a good amount of discussion of Sirius in the scientific press in the '20s so that by the time Griaule arrived, the Dogon may have had a grounding in 20th century technological matters brought to them by visitors from other parts of earth and transmitted in conversation.

Or, Griaule's account may reflect his own interests more than that of the Dogon. He made no secret of the fact that his intention was to redeem African thought. When Walter van Beek studied the Dogon, he found no evidence they knew Sirius was a double star or that Sirius B is extremely dense and has a fifty-year orbit.

Knowledge of the stars is not important either in daily life or in ritual [to the Dogon]. The position of the sun and the phases of the moon are more pertinent for Dogon reckoning. No Dogon outside of the circle of Griaule's informants had ever heard of sigu tolo or po tolo... Most important, no one, even within the circle of Griaule informants, had ever heard or understood that Sirius was a double star (Ortiz de Montellano).*

According to Thomas Bullard, van Beek speculates that Griaule "wished to affirm the complexity of African religions and questioned his informants in such a forceful leading manner that they created new myths by confabulation." Griaule either informed the Dogon of Sirius B or "he misinterpreted their references to other visible stars near Sirius as recognition of the invisible companion" (Bullard).

The only mystery is how anyone could take seriously either the notion of amphibious aliens or telescopic vision due to melanin.


Robert Temple himself has told you in his own words that his work is not to be taken seriously.
and you know hes a fully qualified journalist (that should ring alarm bells on its own)
if you want to go on harping about how its all true after this then don't expect anyone to take you seriously
thumbsup.gif
longer explanation with more detail here
http://www.csicop.org/si/7809/sirius.html
bee
QUOTE (Stixxman @ Nov 1 2007, 02:06 PM) *
while Temple MAY be doubted what cannot be doubted is the fact that he is attempting to improve or help our overall perception of the topic. MAybe its flights of fancy but it seems prettty lucid for that, and maybe it will aid in the overall study of the sphinx. If proven wrong it is not necessary to think it was all bad. At the least it would eliminate a theory and bring the conclusion closer.


I agree...... thumbsup.gif


jaylemurph
I quite agree with Kerkinana.

Temple (knowingly or not) passes off false facts as true. You can't get around that. And fostering fantasy in no way helps to "improve our perceptions of the topic". There's a big enough problem here with people not being able to distinguish reality and fiction, anyway.

(And no, I'm not implying bee or CS. More like the guy on the UFO forum how thought a movie of an alien was real.)

--Jaylemurph
SunDogDayze
QUOTE (jaylemurph @ Nov 1 2007, 11:50 AM) *
I quite agree with Kerkinana.

Temple (knowingly or not) passes off false facts as true. You can't get around that. And fostering fantasy in no way helps to "improve our perceptions of the topic". There's a big enough problem here with people not being able to distinguish reality and fiction, anyway.

(And no, I'm not implying bee or CS. More like the guy on the UFO forum how thought a movie of an alien was real.)

--Jaylemurph



I was thinking quite the same thing.
Harte
Looks like very few people read even the quoted portions of the links I gave in an earlier post. If anyone did, they'd see that Temple is not only a liar, but a thieving liar.

Did anyone notice that the quote I provided stated that Temple claims the Dogon had no contact with Westerners before 1945?

Does anyone think this info would come as a surprise to the members of the Dogon tribe that served in World War I?

Another blatant lie by Temple.

How about his lying about Isaac Azimov, a name that I would think would at the very least garner some affection at a forum like this one?

Do we not owe the "Good Doctor" all the animosity toward Temple that we can muster?

Harte
bee
QUOTE (Harte @ Nov 1 2007, 05:10 PM) *
[How about his lying about Isaac Azimov, a name that I would think would at the very least garner some affection at a forum like this one?


Or did Isaac Azimov lie about Robert Temple? His (Azimov's) back-tracking and excuses were suspicious to
say the least.

QUOTE
Do we not owe the "Good Doctor" all the animosity toward Temple that we can muster?


Spare us the melodrama, please....it's embarassing.... grin2.gif

This is a thread about the sphinx....but your classic sceptic response to Temple should alert anyone with a mind
of their own that there is more to all this than meets the eye....

Anyone reading this thread can make up their own mind.....but before they can really do this, they should
read the book 'The Sirius Mystery' for themselves......a fuller discussion of the sphinx/anubis business.....plus lots,
lots more is contained within the 1998 revised edition.

........................................................................

Chill out guys.....it's only a book....not a matter of life or death.... tongue.gif
Lion of Judah
I think that the Sphinx must be the oldest monument in Egypt some say its over 10000yrs old
Essan
QUOTE (bee @ Nov 1 2007, 07:00 PM) *
Anyone reading this thread can make up their own mind.....but before they can really do this, they should
read the book 'The Sirius Mystery' for themselves......a fuller discussion of the sphinx/anubis business.....plus lots,
lots more is contained within the 1998 revised edition.


I found it very unconvincing, full of supposition and error, but most of all difficult to read. I much prefer Von Daniken or Sitchin for an amusing read to while away a quite afternoon grin2.gif
Harte
QUOTE (Essan @ Nov 2 2007, 05:22 AM) *
I found it very unconvincing, full of supposition and error, but most of all difficult to read. I much prefer Von Daniken or Sitchin for an amusing read to while away a quite afternoon grin2.gif

Essan,

"Difficult to read?" That was precisely what that well-known liar (according to Bee) Azimov said about it.

So, since Bee hasn't said this about the book, and the liar Azimov said it was basically unreadable, then you must be lying too! laugh.gif

Harte
Harte
QUOTE (bee @ Nov 1 2007, 02:00 PM) *
Spare us the melodrama, please....it's embarassing.... grin2.gif


Perhaps you didn't know that "the Good Doctor" was what Asimov's peers in the Science Fiction field called him?

No melodrama.


Harte
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (Harte @ Nov 2 2007, 04:10 PM) *
Essan,

"Difficult to read?" That was precisely what that well-known liar (according to Bee) Azimov said about it.

So, since Bee hasn't said this about the book, and the liar Azimov said it was basically unreadable, then you must be lying too! laugh.gif

Harte


having just read something written by Greg Little it would appear that Essan is actually your friend with the forum and the useless knowledge Harte

wink2.gif
bee
I won't be drawn into juvenile tit-for-tat arguements with anyone over this.....

Readers of this thread must judge for themselves the merits of what has been said....

The motives behind what has been said.

And the conduct of the 'members' posting.......



I, personally, haven't got anything more to say about the sphinx right now.....but another day...?? happy.gif
Harte
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Nov 2 2007, 12:59 PM) *
having just read something written by Greg Little it would appear that Essan is actually your friend with the forum and the useless knowledge Harte

wink2.gif


Never read anything that Greg Little, Doctor of Counseling and glorified marriage counselor, has to say about anything at all, even if it's about counseling.

Hey Essan,

She's talking here about Marduk, though it wasn't I who said that he has "useless knowledge" (quite the contrary.)

Harte
kmt_sesh
Seems we've strayed far from discussions of the Sphinx. One more sidetrack, perhaps:

QUOTE
also Leo wasn't seen as a lion by the AE and there is no evidence that they even knew what a zodiac was until the hellenistic period


That's not quite correct. In fact, the oldest-known Zodiac in recognizable form comes from Egypt, in the tomb of the famous steward of Hatshepsut named Senenmut (or Senmut, depending on your preference). This man lived in Dynasty 18 around 1460 BCE--over 700 years before the Greeks were colonizing the Mediterranean. His tomb with its zodiac is located at Deir el Bahri, near the splendid mortuary temple of Hatshepsut.

But returning to the Sphinx, it never ceases to amaze me how people still feel compelled to hold to wild speculations. We can of course outright dismiss any Atlantis nonsense (that is, if we want to hold to realistic history as revealed to us by existing evidence), but we can also forget about any notion of a date of some 10,000 years as proposed by outlandish pretenders such as J.A. West and Robert Schoch. These men are clearly not stupid but for some strange reason they have abandoned science and history for science fiction.

Let's turn to known history, I always say. If the geological, historical, and/or textual record does not support it, it cannot be taken seriously. To that end I might direct anyone interested to this online article by Zahi Hawass. I am not the biggest fan of Hawass, to be sure, but he writes well and is a respected scholar. He just needs to take a break from television appearances.
kerkinana walsky
senenmuts ceiling doesn't show a zodiac

its a calendar.

zodiakos (kyklos) "zodiac (circle)," lit. "circle of little animals,"

senenmut has no circle and no animals representing constellations

it was a nice try but its well known that the Zodiac was invented in Chaldea and from there went to the Egyptians via the greeks
kmt_sesh
QUOTE
senenmut has no circle and no animals representing constellations


LOL I don't know why you're stuck on "circles" and "animals" for defining a zodiac, but okay...here's a closeup of Senenmut's zodiac. Note the nice circles and animals at the bottom, though granted most of the animals are deities.

The Greek zodiac is only one version thereof, and it has connotations specific to that culture. Numerous anicent cultures used the heavenly bodies and their concepts of divinity to measure time as well as to express their concepts of astrology. In other words, zodiacs served different purposes to different peoples. Maybe we're all just too hung up on the term "zodiac" itself, although all leading Egyptological scholars with whom I'm familiar recognize Senenmut's as one of the earliest versions. I may have erred in my previous post in saying Senenmut's is the oldest known--I've read that but can't verify it.

In truth I have little interest in zodiacs or astrology. All I'm trying to lay down here is that cultures far older than the Greeks used the heavenly bodies for their own version of astrology. wink2.gif

And really, who cares? This thread is supposed to be about the Sphinx.
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (kmt_sesh @ Nov 3 2007, 09:12 PM) *
LOL I don't know why you're stuck on "circles" and "animals" for defining a zodiac, but okay...here's a closeup of Senenmut's zodiac. Note the nice circles and animals at the bottom, though granted most of the animals are deities.

Zodiac is named after the animals not the deities
Senenmuts ceiling is an astronomical diagram and is known as "Senenmut calendar" not "Senenmut Zodiac"
it is the attributation of certain constellations to animals that we were talking about specifically because someone mentioned that the sphinx was a dog and must be Anubis because the egyptians saw Leo as a Dog. this plainly is not true
I am stuck on circles for defining a zodiac because that is how a zodiac is defined by the circular prosession of the stars it symbolizes which are represented by animals

QUOTE (kmt_sesh @ Nov 3 2007, 09:12 PM) *
The Greek zodiac is only one version thereof, and it has connotations specific to that culture. Numerous anicent cultures used the heavenly bodies and their concepts of divinity to measure time as well as to express their concepts of astrology. In other words, zodiacs served different purposes to different peoples. Maybe we're all just too hung up on the term "zodiac" itself, although all leading Egyptological scholars with whom I'm familiar recognize Senenmut's as one of the earliest versions. I may have erred in my previous post in saying Senenmut's is the oldest known--I've read that but can't verify it. In truth I have little interest in zodiacs or astrology. All I'm trying to lay down here is that cultures far older than the Greeks used the heavenly bodies for their own version of astrology. wink2.gif

the Zodiac of the greeks was developed from that of the Chaldeans who got the idea in the first place from Babylonian astronomers who were the foremost astronomers in the ancient world. this was back when Astrology was a science and used to make predictions in the real world. the earliest depiction of a zodiac in egypt was on the celing of the greek built Dendera temple.

there simply wasn't anyone before the Babylonians paying enough attention to the nights sky to notice a zodiac or simple things such as precession which would require you to need one. If you have evidence there was don't waste time telling me, publish a peer reviewed paper and become famous.


thumbsup.gif
kmt_sesh
QUOTE
Zodiac is named after the animals not the deities
Senenmuts ceiling is an astronomical diagram and is known as "Senenmut calendar" not "Senenmut Zodiac"


Again, tom-a-to/tom-ah-to. I'm not interested in arguing over semantics based on modern perspectives and Merriam-Webster definitions.

QUOTE
there simply wasn't anyone before the Babylonians paying enough attention to the nights sky to notice a zodiac or simple things such as precession which would require you to need one.


Obviously the Egyptians far predate the Babylonians, and it's common knowledge the Egyptians' civil calendar was based on such astronomical observations as the appearance of Sirius. Their very preparations for the season of planting, including the annual governmental census and surveys of cultivatable lands, were based on such observations in advance of the inundation.

Now, if you wish to reply, please do so. But let's also try to get the discussion back to the Sphinx. I enjoy UM but rarely have I seen discussions in other forums spiral off into such off-topic debates.
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (kmt_sesh @ Nov 3 2007, 09:46 PM) *
Again, tom-a-to/tom-ah-to. I'm not interested in arguing over semantics based on modern perspectives and Merriam-Webster definitions.



Obviously the Egyptians far predate the Babylonians, and it's common knowledge the Egyptians' civil calendar was based on such astronomical observations as the appearance of Sirius. Their very preparations for the season of planting, including the annual governmental census and surveys of cultivatable lands, were based on such observations in advance of the inundation.

Now, if you wish to reply, please do so. But let's also try to get the discussion back to the Sphinx. I enjoy UM but rarely have I seen discussions in other forums spiral off into such off-topic debates.


you started thsi by claiming senemuts celing was a zodiac which it wasn't

youre now claiming that the Egyptians had a zodiac because they had a calendar based on Sirius ?

if you're going to make claims like this then your belief isn't good enough

you need evidence

p.s. the Chaldeans got their astronomical knowledge from the Babylonians who got their knowledge from the Akkadians who got their knowledge from the Sumerians who far predate the Egyptians

so either way you look at it the Egyptians didn't do it and theres no evidence they did
QUOTE
The division of the ecliptic into the zodiacal signs originates perhaps in Babylonian ("Chaldean") astronomy as early as the 1st millennium BC (likely during Median/"Neo-Babylonian" times) (Powell 2004).

The Babylonian calendar assigns each month a constellation, beginning with the position of the Sun at vernal equinox. Babylonian astronomers at some point during the 1st millennium BC divided the ecliptic into twelve equal zones of celestial longitude to create the first known celestial coordinate system; a coordinate system that boasts some advantages over modern systems (such as equatorial coordinate system or ecliptic coordinate system).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zodiac#History

so............?

anything to add

original.gif

and don't worry too much about going off topic
this was the OP again for your reference
QUOTE (LucidElement @ Sep 17 2004, 08:38 AM) *
The Sphinx was said to be built by survivors of Atlantis, many many theories have it that the lost city of Atlantis lies beneath the Sphinx's paws at Giza. Patterns of wathering on the Sphinx suggest that many parts of it were erdoded by water, but the area has been desert since before 3,000 bc... -D.K K.I.S.S Unexplained Series.... VERY INTERESTING!!!


I think we both agree thats a pretty pointless idea to discuss as its firmly based in the works of Edgar Cayce and Madame Blavatsky neither of whom had a clue what they were talking about when anything historical came out of their mouths

wink2.gif
bee
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Nov 3 2007, 09:24 PM) *
[it is the attributation of certain constellations to animals that we were talking about specifically because someone mentioned that the sphinx was a dog and must be Anubis because the egyptians saw Leo as a Dog.


Now this is getting ridiculous.... I quoted Robert Temple's SPECULATION that the sphinx MAY be
Anubis......where did anyone say that the Egyptians saw Leo as a dog? I'm not going to trawl though
the whole thread to check it out.....so remind me where this was said.


1.618
QUOTE (bee @ Nov 3 2007, 10:06 PM) *
Now this is getting ridiculous.... I quoted Robert Temple's SPECULATION that the sphinx MAY be
Anubis......where did anyone say that the Egyptians saw Leo as a dog? I'm not going to trawl though
the whole thread to check it out.....so remind me where this was said.


Shouldn't worry about it. Pointless arguing has taken over an interesting post.......again.
kmt_sesh
QUOTE
p.s. the Chaldeans got their astronomical knowledge from the Babylonians who got their knowledge from the Akkadians who got their knowledge from the Sumerians who far predate the Egyptians


The Sumerians do predate the Egyptians, but not considerably so. Modern archaeology and philology have demonstrated that. But your string of Babylonians-Akkadians-Sumerians represents a long string of time and several sets of complex, very different peoples, ethnoarchaeologically and linguistically. There were huge changes along the way in these cultures and significant cultural adaptations.

But again, can't we debate the Sphinx? That's why I joined in on this discussion. happy.gif
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (bee @ Nov 3 2007, 10:06 PM) *
Now this is getting ridiculous.... I quoted Robert Temple's SPECULATION that the sphinx MAY be
Anubis......where did anyone say that the Egyptians saw Leo as a dog? I'm not going to trawl though
the whole thread to check it out.....so remind me where this was said.

its all your fault then

wink2.gif

QUOTE (kmt_sesh @ Nov 3 2007, 10:09 PM) *
The Sumerians do predate the Egyptians, but not considerably so.

2000 years is considerable

thumbsup.gif
1.618
QUOTE (kmt_sesh @ Nov 3 2007, 10:09 PM) *
The Sumerians do predate the Egyptians, but not considerably so. Modern archaeology and philology have demonstrated that. But your string of Babylonians-Akkadians-Sumerians represents a long string of time and several sets of complex, very different peoples, ethnoarchaeologically and linguistically. There were huge changes along the way in these cultures and significant cultural adaptations.

But again, can't we debate the Sphinx? That's why I joined in on this discussion. happy.gif


I've read a lot about the sphinx, retained very little. I know that carved thing in front is supposed to date it but i've read quite a few thing where it is said that the dating of egyptian dynasties etc is mostly guesswork. This for me gives feasability to alternative history writers who propose that the sphinx could be over 5000 years old. grin2.gif
Moro
It would be really interesting to see what the sphinx really looks like underneath all that sand! It very well may be possible
that the sphinx is sitting on top of some sort of temple...
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (Tom R @ Nov 3 2007, 10:20 PM) *
It would be really interesting to see what the sphinx really looks like underneath all that sand! It very well may be possible
that the sphinx is sitting on top of some sort of temple...



QUOTE
The material of the Sphinx is the limestone bedrock of what geologists call the Muqqatam Formation, which originated fifty million years ago from sediments deposited at the bottom of sea waters that engulfed northeast Africa during the Middle Eocene period

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/sphinx1.htm
then again

thumbsup.gif
1.618
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Nov 3 2007, 10:28 PM) *


The AE were known to carve through rock.
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (1.618 @ Nov 3 2007, 10:30 PM) *
The AE were known to carve through rock.


ah so you admit it was the AE who did all the work in Egypt then

original.gif
1.618
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Nov 3 2007, 10:34 PM) *
ah so you admit it was the AE who did all the work in Egypt then

original.gif


LOL. They would still be AE even if they were doing the carving 5000, 10000, 20000 or 30000 years ago. But then we get onto.....define the ancient egyptians.
What usually springs to mind in the first instance is the culture with the hieroglphs and wall paintings when that is just the most popular conception of AE.
kerkinana walsky
QUOTE (1.618 @ Nov 3 2007, 10:36 PM) *
LOL. They would still be AE even if they were doing the carving 5000, 10000, 20000 or 30000 years ago.


The Ancient Egyptians are a known culture which was established by the unification of Narmer/Menes around 3100bce

so any earlier civilisation wouldn't be them

the earlier civs who lived in that region are all well known anyway
iirc the earlier culture 4000 - 3100 was known as the Badarians

would have to google to find out the names of the ones before them

naahh
you can do it if you're interested

thumbsup.gif
1.618
QUOTE (kerkinana walsky @ Nov 3 2007, 10:40 PM) *
The Ancient Egyptians are a known culture which was established by the unification of Narmer/Menes around 3100bce

the earlier civs who lived in that region are all well known anyway
iirc the earlier culture 4000 - 3100 was known as the Badarians
naahh
you can do it if you're interested
thumbsup.gif


As you couldn't be arsed....http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/badari/info.html

http://www.digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk/chronology/index.html
http://library.case.edu/ksl/ecoll/books/br...0/brubad00.html
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0021-8537...%3E2.0.CO%3B2-D

I would still say they were AE as they lived in egypt in ancient times. thumbsup.gif






































kmt_sesh
QUOTE
the earlier civs who lived in that region are all well known anyway
iirc the earlier culture 4000 - 3100 was known as the Badarians


The Badarians were the first recognizable culture of Egyptian prehistory. This is based primarily on ceramics and burials, and the period is dated to about 5000-4000 BCE.

From there we have the Naqada I period, also known as Amratian, and it dates to about 4000-3500 BCE.

Next comes the Naqada II period, also known as Gerzean, which dates to about 3500-3150 BCE.

Then comes Naqada III, also called Dynasty 0 because this was at the cusp of the founding of the Egyptian state; it dates to about 3150-3000 BCE.

You're right, kerkinana walsky, these cultures are well known. There is of course plenty still to learn about them, but through careful analysis of many years leading scholars like Toby Wilkinson have been able clearly to demonstrate the progression these cultures followed and how they eventually developed into the Egyptian state.

As for Wilkinson, I would have to recommend both his Genesis of the Pharaohs and Early Dynastic Egpyt. I have yet to come across a better pair of books on the study of Egyptian prehistory and the forces that led to nationhood around 5,100 years ago. There is a book called The Archaeology of Early Egypt that looks quite promising, but I have yet to read it. If anyone has, please let me know what you think.

In any case, through books such as these we see how the earliest kings of a united Egypt led up to the ability to build such wonders as the Great Pyramid and Sphinx. It's all quite clear and equally fascinating.
hucktunes
In 1798 Napoleon, the great leader of the French Republic and the Grand Army, led 38,000 troops as well as civilian archaeologists into Egypt and commenced to digging around the pyramids and the Sphinx. Buried deep under the feet of the Sphinx he uncovered tunes dating back to the very beginning of civilization, music as old as Egypt herself. Things did not go well in Egypt and he still had the world to conquer, so he decided to sell the tunes and some land to the United States in order to finance his plan to spread the ideals of Democracy to all of Europe. President Thomas Jefferson was a great lover of music and was excited to give these great tunes to the American people as a gift, so in 1803 he purchased these tunes and the land from Napoleon for 15 million dollars. As the tunes were paid for with public funds, these tunes are public domain and belong to every American to do with as we please. My thanks go to Napoleon, Thomas Jefferson, and all the great old time musicians and musicologists that have studied and interpreted these fine tunes from ancient Egypt, these great American Fiddle Tunes.


Sorry 'bout that. I couldn't resist. Please, continue with the discussion.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.