Progress In Egyptology

[cladking]

On 2/25/2024 at 10:00 PM, cladking said:

1487a. Thou art standing, Osiris; thy shadow is over thee, Osiris;

This is remarkable.  It is the darkest alexanders band I've seen;

[cladking]

Utterance 403.

699a. To say: O thou whose ‘ȝb-tree becomes green, who is over his field;

699b. O thou flower-opener, who is on his sycamore;

699c. O thou with the green lands, who is over his ’iȝm-tree;

700a. O lord of the green fields, rejoice to-day.

700b. N. will henceforth be among you; N. will go forth in your neighbourhood;

700c. N. will live on that on which you live.

701a. O bulls of Atum,

701b. make N. fresh, refresh N. more than the red crown which is upon his head;

701c. more than the inundation which is up to his breast (or, lap, or knee), more than the dates, which are in his fist.

 

I've known what his meant for some time now.  

This is minor but worth noting.   I've understood this ritual for years.   

The new understanding of the word "lord" to mean "that which makes to stand" caused me to consult Faulkner's translation again. 

 This ritual  is about water and specifically "osiris N" as water.  He falls upon the fields because when he creates the rainbow he falls from the sky and causes the plants to stand.  He is "Lord of the green Fields".  He sprays out the top of the sycamore fashioned as a djed by the "Priestesses of the Sycamore" causing the flowers to open and the fields to become green.   The red crown exists only in the early summer when flow begins and is not as high and colored by the siderite binder of egyptian red sandstone that has been dissolved by nun's carbonic acid.  "N. will henceforth be among you; N. will go forth in your neighbourhood;.." doesn't work well with the new understanding.  Certainly the green fields are caused to stand but the thinking doesn't flow as it should.  Faulkner appears to have a better translation here, "O gleaming of banks who are upon your imt-tree".   The water is channeled down the plateau in a creek with imt-trees growing on its banks.  

Most of these utterances are very "easy" to understand if you just keep reading them till they make sense.  Once you decide they must be about religion and magic you are lost.  Ancient people had no beliefs and didn't even have a word the meant or implied belief.  Their language breaks Zipf's Law because they didn't think like Egyptologists think.  

Edited March 25 by cladking

[cladking]

...Another reference to rainbows!!

805b. and thou sittest upon thy throne.

805c. Thy dismembered limbs are collected by the two mighty ones, the crowns of Upper and Lower Egypt, as lord of the Bows.

The LORD of bows is "osiris n".   His crown rests in the Upper Eye of Horus only during construction as the djed keeps this crown stable and enduring.  Even at this time a pretty good rainbow can form from the spray and mist generated.  

805c is easy enough.  When osiris n is complete, reassembled, he stretches from the waters of the abyss overseen by nun through the djed and the eye of horus and all the way to Lake  of Reeds and winding watercourse to the Marsh of Offerings.   Whenever he is complete he is the "Lord of Rainbows" (he is that which makes the sky arcs to stand).  

[cladking]

I'm actually making reasonably good progress but most of what I'm finding is very insignificant and not worth a post.  You might check out the "why osiris... " thread though for further substantiation of the contention that he is merely dead atum.

 

I did find this just the other day.  It's yet another rainbow reference.  

1322a. Each god who constructs not a stairway for N.,

1322b. when he ascends and lifts himself to the sky,

1322c. he shall have no pḳ-cake, he shall have no shade,

1323a. he shall not wash himself in the ḫȝw-bowl,

This is another reference to alexander's band.  

I'm suspecting this implies the "spirits well equipped by reason of their mouth" may drink from the h3w-bowl making this the scientific word for the "Lake of the Jackal".  This is all becoming so esoteric that confirmation will be quite difficult.  The scientific term for the airshafts at the Lake of the Jackal was "serket" and specifically the dorsal air siphon of the water scorpion (nepa ceneria).  The nature of Ancient Language is such that these words don't even need to be known at all because all words are mathematically and logically related.  A simple equation can stand for any unknown word once its relationship is established.  None of these words can be "defined".  It's not how their language worked.  When Egyptology defines words in terms of the different language of the BotD they are not only removing the intended meaning but inserting a brand new one.  

[Wepwawet]

On 3/28/2024 at 2:11 AM, cladking said:

The LORD of bows

This term usually refers to the "Nine Bows", a reference to Egypt's enemies. Here is one representation of them, they also appear on Tutankhamun's sandals so that he is forever trampling them.

[cladking]

On 4/23/2024 at 5:58 AM, Wepwawet said:

This term usually refers to the "Nine Bows", a reference to Egypt's enemies. Here is one representation of them, they also appear on Tutankhamun's sandals so that he is forever trampling them.

I'm incredulous you'd even say this. No matter how many times I say that Egyptologists are wrong about revery single thing because they solved the Pyramid Texts in terms of the "book of the dead" people keep supporting this horrendous methodology.  "Bows" meant something entirely different to the pyramid builders which is why they referred to them as "the light scatterers of the sky" and said they "ordered the lights above".  Rainbows are in the sky and order the lights by scattering it according to its frequency.  

I said "lord" means "that which causes to stand so why would any Egyptian or their Gods want their enemies to stand?

Don't take it from me.  Take it from the actual builders of the pyramids.

673b. Horus bends his Nine Bows against this spirit which comes out of the earth,

Rainbows are made by the spirits that come out of the earth and don't need Egypt's enemies to arise.  

1486a. Assemble those who dwell in Nun; collect those who are among the bows.

"Nun" is the waters of the abyss which is the source of the rainbows.  Those among the bows are collected to lift weight.

 

1719d. as the jackal (god), nome-governor (of the Bows), the Two Enneads,

1719e. as Horus who presides over his, abode (or thigh-offering).

The chief builder is the "jackal priest" who controls every aspect of construction including generation of the rainbows.

629b. behold, thou are bent around, and art round like the "Circle which encircles the nb.wt";

A circular rainbow encircles the primeval mound.

1460a. N. is this (kind of) colour which comes out of Nun.

 

There are actually dozens and dozens of references to rainbows in the Pyramid Texts and I'd be happy to provide more for you.  The PT has an entirely different meaning if you assume the builders made sense than it does if you assume they were just as superstitious as the authors of the book of the dead and people today.  

When you use bad methodology the results are dependent not on reality but on the methodology and the assumptions.  

[Antigonos]

11 minutes ago, cladking said:

I'm incredulous

When you use bad methodology the results are dependent not on reality but on the methodology and the assumptions.  

 

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, cladking said:

I'm incredulous

I am incredulous of your incredulity to understand the credible.

[cladking]

7 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

I am incredulous of your incredulity to understand the credible.

It's simply not credible in the least.  

Certainly it agrees with the "book of the dead" and King Tut's beliefs but this isn't about them, it's about the meaning of the Pyramid Texts and the artefacts from that era.  The words simply don't join up with later ideas and later writing.

737a. To say: O N.,
737b. take thy garment of light, take thy veil upon thee,

They're talking about a god being clothed in light with its shadow above it.

1443a. To say: The face of heaven is washed; the vault of heaven is bright;

When the part of heaven that shows is washed it becomes bright.

393a. To say: The sky is overcast, the stars are darkened,
393b. the bows are agitated, the bones of the earth-gods quake.

The mist flies up into alexander's band becoming dark.  With unstable water the rainbows are unstable as well.

It ascends from the earth to the heavens (and orders the lights above), then descends again to the earth; and in it is the power of the highest and the lowest.

1455a. for N. is a star, the light-scatterer of the sky. 

This is a clear scientific description of what the mist does.

1680c. broad are thy steps of light;

And this is their appearance.

138b. ... Thou purifiest thyself in the dew of the stars;

The stars fall like dew, as mist.  

 

There are soi many references to rainbows in the Pyramid Texts for a simple reason; they were the "Rituals of Ascension" and the king ascended only on a "good day of running on the pyramids when inundations were upon the land".  There was always a very vivid and bright rainbow visible to the crowds as these rituals were read to them.  Even the children in the assembled masses understood these simple words.  We don't understand them because the formatting is wholly alien to us and the way we think.  But the literal meaning is still pretty much exactly what they intended to say.  

It is not credible that the authors of the book of the dead would see that there's a scientific interpretation of these words because they were highly ignorant and superstitious just like we think the pyramid builders were.  We are superstitious.  The authors of the "book of the dead" were superstitious.  The great pyramid builders didn't have a single word that meant or implied the existence of beliefs.  

 

[cladking]

455a. Stand there, great reed-float, like Wp-wȝ.wt,

455b. filled with thy splendour, come forth from the horizon,

455c. after thou hast taken possession of the white crown in the water-springs, great and mighty, which are in the south of Libya,

 

The great reed float (henu-boat) will come forth from the horizon after it has taken the crown of the great water springs.  

It's like nobody reads this stuff.  "Wepwawet" is the water standing in the Upper Eye of Horus which creates the rainbow and so long as it stands the henu boat fills.   There were no "Gods" of any sort and they had no word that meant or implied belief.  It quite possibly  onomatopoeia and was the sound that was made by the water.   

Everything you need to know appears right in the literal meaning of the PT.

https://sacred-texts.com/egy/pyt/index.htm

But you must quit parsing the words.   They mean only what they say, not what you believe they say.  It's very hard for modern language speakers to not parse words.  

 

Read the post above too, and try to tell me there are no rainbows in ancient literature.  

[meda.]

Well, in the latest news from Egyptology, turns out they discovered that the ancient Egyptians were really into, wait for it...cat memes! Yeah, seems like all those hieroglyhics were just elaborate captions for cute cat pictures?

 

[Wepwawet]

8 hours ago, cladking said:

It's like nobody reads this stuff.

By "nobody" you mean just you, as you haven't got the slightest clue.

Edited April 28 by Wepwawet

[cladking]

Quote

The pyramid builders were more complex and had more complex knowledge than Bees.  Their "Representations of Theory" are merely mistranslated by Egyptologists as "words of the gods".  Words were powerful and effective when used by ancient people.  They sustained individuals and the entire culture.   But this was a culture doomed to failure because language was becoming far too complex to be understood by anyone at all. They knew this was coming and build G1 as a time capsule so they could be remembered.  All great pyramids were mnemonics for the dead kings but G1 was ALSO a time capsule with the most important thing in existence right under the NE corner.  They even said they secreted some of osiris' efflux in here which was four fiery red jugs full of carbon dioxide and sulphuric gasses. 

A thought occurred to me here after writing this in another thread.  

I always assumed that when language changed, perhaps ~2000 BC, and the many pidgin languages became the official languages of state that all the Ancient Language speakers would simply be out on their ear.  They couldn't really communicate with the new officials and would have no function in society.  This contributed greatly to the upheaval caused by the change in language.  But it's entirely possible that initially many of them became advisors and affairs of state carried on as close to the old ways as could be expected in such a chaotic situation.  In other words perhaps the change came much earlier such as between the 4th and 5th dynasties.  As time went on not only did communication become increasingly problematical but the interests of the leaders and the advisors diverged to the point that the advisors went off to live separately becoming the "Nephilim" of the Bible.  

...Just a thought.  I'll be watching for evidence, though. 

[cladking]

Utterance 339.

553a. To say: The hunger of N. is from the hand of Shu; the thirst of N. is from the hand of Tefnut.

553b. N. lives on the morning bread, which comes at its (appointed) time.

553c. N. lives on that on which Shu lives;

553d. N. eats, that which Tefnut eats.

People see a ritual like this and believe it makes sense as incantation but no two people agree on what it means or why the author might say an absurdity like that the dead king is made hungry by an imaginary consciousness and he lives on the same thing as this imaginary consciousness. So they launch into convoluted explanations and then rewrite the words so they make more sense vis a vis their convoluted explanation.  Hence we have Allen's translation and every new translation gets increasingly obscure.  It's no wonder people are being told that no one can understand an English translation without eight years of college.  

This ritual makes perfect sense when properly modeled.  This is a little pick me up at the start of the day for one of the building crews.  These were not stinky footed bumpkins dragging stones hither and yon but individuals who operated the Bull of Heaven.  They were intelligent, observant, and fast on the uptake.   They each had a healthy breakfast that they themselves had chosen consisting of many calories and lots of protein.  They were raring to get to work at building a new body for the king so he he could live forever in peoples' memories.  The work was only as hard as each individual chose it to be and most were highly energetic and highly motivated.   There was always plenty to do no matter your occupation.  

It was an honor to be chosen for the very very few jobs associated with the gods building the pyramids.  Individuals from cities where pyramid building greats of the past had been born had first chance at being selected.  The individual who thought up using natron to force eruptions was from Chemis nearby the pyramid so all those who worked with the complex interactions of compounds were therefore "Chemists".  Those selected were experts in chemical reactions who lived in Chemis.  Each individual Chemist was conversant in all aspects of building but was still a chemist by trade.  They didn't have the kind of specialization we do but individuals still gravitated to fields with which they were most comfortable and in which they were most interested.  Dozens of chemists would have lived in a city the size of Chemis and they were selected by ability and chance.  This same thing applied to every occupation; only the best in each city need apply.  If you lived in a city that had no previous greats you could still land a job  as one of the very few unskilled workers or in the quarry.  

There were hundreds of people who worked on the pyramid and 18 gods.  

These gods did the lion's share of the work.  Indeed the two primary ones were called the "Double Lion" and were composed of "shu" and "tefnut". Since we all, and even dead kings, are what we eat it was "shu" (upward) who provided the morning bread to the growing dead king.  Shu brought the horuses from the quarry (taet) and then lifted them straight up the sides of the five step pyramid a step at a time.  When he brought water to the top he rocked the fire-pan thereby signaling the workers to come hear this ritual before their day's work.  Bringing water to the top created great hunger in the growing pyramid; he (the king/ pyramid)  wanted to eat more stones.  Tefnut (downward) took the water away with her hands inducing thirst in the dead king while simultaneously bringing the morning bread and allowing the dead king to live on the exact same thing as shu.  

 

This is all remarkably simple and every  day it looks simpler and I better understand it. It all fits together like a hand in a glove or the five fingers of geb as the pyramid.  It's just a different way to think and believing nobody can understand a translation is illogical nonsense.  If it really were incantation as Egyptology believes they couldn't understand it either.  

People have the notion I must be wrong because otherwise Egyptology would agree but the reality is they couldn't possibly even consider these words.  We are all locked into our beliefs but we are also locked into a way of thinking.  Ancient people didn't even experience thought at all and had no words that meant of implied they could think.  Egyptologists never even noticed this!!!!!!!!

Edited May 10 by cladking

[cladking]

On 4/28/2024 at 2:05 AM, Wepwawet said:

By "nobody" you mean just you, as you haven't got the slightest clue.

"Reading" to most modern people most of the time is the assigning of meaning to words in sentences such as the sentence make sense to them.  I call this parsing.  This is what we do with modern language.  

But "reading" has other meanings.  For instance have you never seen a word you didn't recognize in a book but just left the meaning blank until you saw the word enough times to deduce the meaning?   I call this "solving word meanings in context" and it is very much a form of reading.  You can do this with the Pyramid Texts as well; solve the word meanings in context.  

I didn't know what any of the words meant when I started.  I had to solve them all.  Yes I used logic charts and lists a lot but more often than not I just read the same passage over and over until it made sense.  

Egyptologists and you didn't do this.  They all had vocabulary lists, dictionaries, and religious beliefs they had derived from the "book of the dead".  Their hands were tied before they even translated the texts.  They HAD NO CHOICE but to find the earliest version of the "book of the dead".  There was no other possible outcome.  

Using the methodology for 150 years has provided nothing but more mysteries and rapidly evolving translations.  They translated the PT and never even READ the translation.  They parsed their beliefs and killed the PT. Their assumptions about a 3000 year civilization and cultural context made them so they can't even read their own translations. 

They are locked into a single way of parsing and thinking and they continue to study a living vibrant culture with their backs turned to it.  

[Antigonos]

2 minutes ago, cladking said:

 

I didn't know what any of the words meant. They translated the PT and never even READ the translation.  They parsed their beliefs and killed the PT. Their assumptions about a 3000 year civilization and cultural context made them so they can't even read their own translations. 

They are locked into a single way of parsing and thinking and they continue to study a living vibrant culture with their backs turned to it.  

 

[Wepwawet]

5 minutes ago, cladking said:

"Reading" to most modern people most of the time is the assigning of meaning to words in sentences such as the sentence make sense to them.  I call this parsing.  This is what we do with modern language.  

But "reading" has other meanings.  For instance have you never seen a word you didn't recognize in a book but just left the meaning blank until you saw the word enough times to deduce the meaning?   I call this "solving word meanings in context" and it is very much a form of reading.  You can do this with the Pyramid Texts as well; solve the word meanings in context.  

I didn't know what any of the words meant when I started.  I had to solve them all.  Yes I used logic charts and lists a lot but more often than not I just read the same passage over and over until it made sense.  

Egyptologists and you didn't do this.  They all had vocabulary lists, dictionaries, and religious beliefs they had derived from the "book of the dead".  Their hands were tied before they even translated the texts.  They HAD NO CHOICE but to find the earliest version of the "book of the dead".  There was no other possible outcome.  

Using the methodology for 150 years has provided nothing but more mysteries and rapidly evolving translations.  They translated the PT and never even READ the translation.  They parsed their beliefs and killed the PT. Their assumptions about a 3000 year civilization and cultural context made them so they can't even read their own translations. 

They are locked into a single way of parsing and thinking and they continue to study a living vibrant culture with their backs turned to it.  

Until you show your workings, your methodology, or any proof of your contentions, your ramblings are just incoherent noise. Just what is it with you fringe fantasists that providing evidence is so far beyond you.

[cladking]

1 minute ago, Wepwawet said:

Until you show your workings, your methodology, or any proof of your contentions, your ramblings are just incoherent noise. Just what is it with you fringe fantasists that providing evidence is so far beyond you.

You just quoted exactly where I showed my methodology and then said I need to show my methodology.  

I solved word meanings in Ancient Language through context while simultaneously reverse engineering the great pyramids. 

This IS my methodology.  I began with almost no assumptions and a few I did have were overturned by evidence. 

I am a scientist and metaphysician by nature and training so of course I never expected the literal meaning of the PT to be the intended meaning.  No one could be more surprised than I when "bring me the boat that flies up and alights" meant exactly that!   

I used sound methodology, Egyptology did not.  

[Wepwawet]

20 minutes ago, cladking said:

You just quoted exactly where I showed my methodology and then said I need to show my methodology.  

I solved word meanings in Ancient Language through context while simultaneously reverse engineering the great pyramids. 

This IS my methodology.  I began with almost no assumptions and a few I did have were overturned by evidence. 

I am a scientist and metaphysician by nature and training so of course I never expected the literal meaning of the PT to be the intended meaning.  No one could be more surprised than I when "bring me the boat that flies up and alights" meant exactly that!   

I used sound methodology, Egyptology did not.  

You have never showed your workings and never provided a shred of evidence for a single one of your contentions. All you have ever done is lie and lie and lie, par for the course for all the fringe.

[cladking]

18 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

provided a shred of evidence for a single one of your contentions.

I have supported everything from water erosion in canals leading to the cliff face counterweight to the simple FACT the builders said bring me the boat that flies up and alights.

Debunkers just have a knee jerk reaction to deny the evidence and support Egyptological methodology and assumptions.  

[Wepwawet]

Just now, cladking said:

I have supported everything from water erosion in canals leading to the cliff face counterweight to the simple FACT the builders said bring me the boat that flies up and alights.

Debunkers just have a knee jerk reaction to deny the evidence and support Egyptological methodology and assumptions.  

Nope, you have never supported anything, all you do is quote Mercer's translation of Sethe's translation of the PT and make up fantasy stories about it.

[cladking]

Just now, cladking said:

Debunkers just have a knee jerk reaction to deny the evidence and support Egyptological methodology and assumptions.  

I say there is an existing funicular in ruins from the east side of G1 to the Nile River and they say "No, that is a holy walkway to the Valley Temple".  This is assumptive.  I have actual evidence.  Everything I say exists in ruins or the words of the builders themselves.  The evidence is very widespread albeit shallow because of the actions of time.  If Egyptology would actually use science I have little doubt my theory could be shown to be essentially correct within days or weeks. 

[cladking]

2 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Nope, you have never supported anything, all you do is quote Mercer's translation of Sethe's translation of the PT and make up fantasy stories about it.

"Hence it runs on, till, close to the edge of the basalt pavement, it branches in two, and narrows yet more; one line runs W., and another turning nearly due S., emerges on the pavement edge at 629.8 to 633.4 from the N.E. corner of the pavement, being there only 3.6 wide. From this remarkable forking, it [p. 50] is evident that the trench cannot have been made with any ideas of sighting along it, or of its marking out a direction or azimuth; and, starting as it does, from the basalt pavement (or from any building which stood there), and running with a steady fall to the nearest point of the cliff edge, it seems exactly as if intended for a drain; the more so as there is plainly a good deal of water-weanng at a point where it falls sharply, at its enlargement. "

I do not understand why believers are impervious to evidence.  

These things are fact and the fact is Egyptologists don't want to see and can not see.  

https://www.ronaldbirdsall.com/gizeh/index.htm

What is wrong with Egyptology?  

[Wepwawet]

2 minutes ago, cladking said:

I have actual evidence.  Everything I say exists in ruins or the words of the builders themselves.

The authors of the PT are not the builders of the Great Pyramid, the texts do not anywhere deal with the Great Pyramid or building anything else, if you believe such rot, then provide evidence.

[cladking]

6 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Nope, you have never supported anything, all you do is quote Mercer's translation of Sethe's translation of the PT and make up fantasy stories about it.

I've used other translators as well.  

Have you really never noticed that my "fantasy stories" agree with the literal meaning of the words and all these "stories" hang together???????