Egyptian evidence in Australia

[Unusual Tournament]

3 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

The Egyptian version are just throwsticks, a weapon for hunting birds. They have no connection to Aboriginal boomerangs.

Australian Aboriginals also used throw sticks.

[Unusual Tournament]

ancient Egyptian throwing sticks

[kmt_sesh]

1 minute ago, Captain Risky said:

Australian Aboriginals also used throw sticks.

I believe Native Americans did, too. A stick you can throw at stuff? That's not a connection.

[+Hammerclaw]

Amerindian throwing sticks.                                                                       

[Unusual Tournament]

connection no. just a similarity between both cultures. 

[Unusual Tournament]

another similarity was that mummification was also practiced by some Aboriginal peoples. 

Indigenous Australia

In certain parts of Australia, mummification was sometimes one part of body disposal, and was not necessarily the final stage. The body of the deceased was sometimes placed on a platform in a tree and exposed to sunlight causing it to dry out. This could also be achieved through smoke-drying, or a combination of the two. Sometimes the internal organs were removed and the cavity packed with grass or other items. Sometimes the orifices were sewn shut to speed the preservation process. In many cases, the corpse was intended to be preserved only for a short time, until all mortuary and mourning rites were completed.

https://australianmuseum.net.au/disposing-of-the-dead-preservation

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Amerindian throwing sticks.                                                                       

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XfTdnWLMLDA

[RoofGardener]

Just popping into this thread - rather late in the day. 

The ancient Egyptians did not have ocean-going boats. If they had traveled to Australia, then they would also have traveled to southern Africa, Madagascar, the southern Middle East (Saudi etc), India, Malaysia, and the far East in general. 

(to say nothing of Europe. They didn't even cross the Mediterranean to Italy or Greece; a MUCH easier prospect).

If there are similarities of artifacts, culture, or language, between Egypt and Australia, then it is parallel development, not interaction.  

[Piney]

4 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

Amerindian throwing sticks.                                                                       

I had a "rabbit stick" just like the 3rd one from the right. I used it for corn rats and groundhogs though. Then I gave it to a friend's father who nailed his own windshield. 

[Oniomancer]

Right, because picking up a stick and throwing it at something is an advanced concept.

https://exarc.net/issue-2015-3/ea/gaulish-throwing-stick-discovery-normandy-study-and-throwing-experimentations

archeo

[Lord Harry]

On 5/11/2007 at 9:59 AM, crystal sage said:

http://rbg-street-scholar-multi-media-e-zi...ieroglyphs.html

 

First line of the quote. The author discredited himself by using the term "hieroglyphics" instead of the proper and scholarly terminology "hieroglyphs." There is no reason to read any further. By using the term "hieroglyphics" ( which is an adjective and cannot be pluralized) the so called "researcher" revealed himself to be a charlatan. 

[Lord Harry]

Any "researcher" who refers to the uni-literal, bi-literal, or tri-literal signs of the ancient Egyptian written language as"hieroglyphics," instead of "hieroglyphs" has not only revealed themselves a rank amateur, but has also completely discredited themselves and nothing they may have to say need be considered by legitimate scholars in the field. 

Hieroglyphic, singular is an adjective designating the Egyptian script. The word CANNOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES BE MADE PLURAL! The individual signs themselves are corporately referred to as hieroglyphs.

[Harte]

On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 10:50 AM, Oniomancer said:

Right, because picking up a stick and throwing it at something is an advanced concept.

https://exarc.net/issue-2015-3/ea/gaulish-throwing-stick-discovery-normandy-study-and-throwing-experimentations

archeo

Maybe they used them to test Stargate connections, the MALP not having been invented yet.

Harte

[kmt_sesh]

16 minutes ago, Harte said:

Maybe they used them to test Stargate connections, the MALP not having been invented yet.

Harte

How did that work? Did the folks on the other end of the Stargate know when to duck?

[Peter Cox]

3 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

How did that work? Did the folks on the other end of the Stargate know when to duck?

Duck.... Yummy. Need some sweet and sour sauce haha!

[Harte]

10 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

How did that work? Did the folks on the other end of the Stargate know when to duck?

If they throw it back at you, you know the planet supports a life form that can throw stuff at you.

Better than not knowing and getting stuff thrown at you after you step through.

Harte

[Lord Harry]

On 5/13/2018 at 5:15 AM, RoofGardener said:

Just popping into this thread - rather late in the day. 

The ancient Egyptians did not have ocean-going boats. If they had traveled to Australia, then they would also have traveled to southern Africa, Madagascar, the southern Middle East (Saudi etc), India, Malaysia, and the far East in general. 

(to say nothing of Europe. They didn't even cross the Mediterranean to Italy or Greece; a MUCH easier prospect).

If there are similarities of artifacts, culture, or language, between Egypt and Australia, then it is parallel development, not interaction.  

That isn't true. I am not defending the erroneous hypothesis of the OP that the ancient Egyptians traveled to Australia. However, they certainly did possess vessels capable of traversing the Mediterranean as evidence by trade contacts with Byblos at least as early as the reign of King Sneferu (r. 2619-2589 BC). That the large cedar ships of the ancient Egyptians would have been capable of traversing the open ocean is possible (even likely) though unproven considering there is no archaeological or textual evidence for such voyages until the 26th Dynasty reign of Necho II (r. 610-595 BC).

They certainty were capable of crossing the Mediterranean by the time of the Old Kingdom. Trade contacts with Cyprus and Crete are attested from at least the Middle Kingdom, and possibly existed much earlier.

Edited May 15, 2018 by Lord Harry

[kmt_sesh]

8 minutes ago, Lord Harry said:

That isn't true. I am not defending the erroneous hypothesis of the OP that the ancient Egyptians traveled to Australia. However, they certainly did possess vessels capable of traversing the Mediterranean as evidence by trade contacts with Byblos at least as early as the reign of King Sneferu (r. 2619-2589 BC). That the large cedar ships of the ancient Egyptians would have been capable of traversing the open ocean is possible (even likely) though unproven considering there is no archaeological or textual evidence for such voyages until the 26th Dynasty reign of Necho II (r. 610-595 BC).

They certainty were capable of crossing the Mediterranean by the time of the Old Kingdom. Trade contacts with Cyprus and Crete are attested from at least the Middle Kingdom, and possibly existed much earlier.

I would add their voyages down to Punt farther south in Africa, which occurred at least as early as the Old Kingdom (although some of these excursions were by land). By the Middle Kingdom they had trackways through the eastern desert and ports along the coast for voyages down the Red Sea. For their trips to Byblos and Punt and other locations, I'd state that they mostly hugged the coast, always within sight of land. They were not explorers, per se, or given to much open-ocean sailing. Exceptions might be made for the Late Period and beyond. For instance, Egypt was part of the massive force of conscripts in the navy of Xerxes when he invaded Greece (480 BCE).

But the business with Australia is patently nonsense, of course. No credible historian or researcher believes that.

[kmt_sesh]

2 hours ago, Harte said:

If they throw it back at you, you know the planet supports a life form that can throw stuff at you.

Better than not knowing and getting stuff thrown at you after you step through.

Harte

And if there's a whole lot of crap coming through the Stargate, you know it's a planet populated by something akin to chimpanzees.

[Lord Harry]

6 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

I would add their voyages down to Punt farther south in Africa, which occurred at least as early as the Old Kingdom (although some of these excursions were by land). By the Middle Kingdom they had trackways through the eastern desert and ports along the coast for voyages down the Red Sea. For their trips to Byblos and Punt and other locations, I'd state that they mostly hugged the coast, always within sight of land. They were not explorers, per se, or given to much open-ocean sailing. Exceptions might be made for the Late Period and beyond. For instance, Egypt was part of the massive force of conscripts in the navy of Xerxes when he invaded Greece (480 BCE).

But the business with Australia is patently nonsense, of course. No credible historian or researcher believes that.

Exactly. And the Egyptians with their cosmological world view based upon the Nile Valley, never would have risked sailing into the unknown unless they were certain such far off lands would have contained mineral or other resources not readily available to them. This fact alone can essentially rule out any Marco Polo type adventures traveling off to Australia.

[RoofGardener]

1 hour ago, Lord Harry said:

That isn't true. I am not defending the erroneous hypothesis of the OP that the ancient Egyptians traveled to Australia. However, they certainly did possess vessels capable of traversing the Mediterranean as evidence by trade contacts with Byblos at least as early as the reign of King Sneferu (r. 2619-2589 BC). That the large cedar ships of the ancient Egyptians would have been capable of traversing the open ocean is possible (even likely) though unproven considering there is no archaeological or textual evidence for such voyages until the 26th Dynasty reign of Necho II (r. 610-595 BC).

They certainty were capable of crossing the Mediterranean by the time of the Old Kingdom. Trade contacts with Cyprus and Crete are attested from at least the Middle Kingdom, and possibly existed much earlier.

 

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

I would add their voyages down to Punt farther south in Africa, which occurred at least as early as the Old Kingdom (although some of these excursions were by land). By the Middle Kingdom they had trackways through the eastern desert and ports along the coast for voyages down the Red Sea. For their trips to Byblos and Punt and other locations, I'd state that they mostly hugged the coast, always within sight of land. They were not explorers, per se, or given to much open-ocean sailing. Exceptions might be made for the Late Period and beyond. For instance, Egypt was part of the massive force of conscripts in the navy of Xerxes when he invaded Greece (480 BCE).

But the business with Australia is patently nonsense, of course. No credible historian or researcher believes that.

Oooh right.. thanks for that folks. 

Umm.. however... is there any evidence of trade or interaction between .. say.. ancient Egypt and  the areas that subsequently became Italy ? Or Greece ? Or southern France ? 

[Lord Harry]

13 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

 

Oooh right.. thanks for that folks. 

Umm.. however... is there any evidence of trade or interaction between .. say.. ancient Egypt and  the areas that subsequently became Italy ? Or Greece ? Or southern France ? 

I'm not sure about Italy or France, but Egypt had trade contacts with the Minoans since the Middle Kingdom and the Mycenaean Greeks by the New Kingdom period. Depictions of Minoan and Greek envoys bearing gifts to the Pharaoh can be seen in painted reliefs from Hatshepsut's mortuary temple.

Edited May 15, 2018 by Lord Harry

[Harte]

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

And if there's a whole lot of crap coming through the Stargate, you know it's a planet populated by something akin to chimpanzees.

Hardly. Anything with appendages can probably throw crap.

Hell, I do it here without even raising my arms.

Harte

[Harte]

26 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

 

Oooh right.. thanks for that folks. 

Umm.. however... is there any evidence of trade or interaction between .. say.. ancient Egypt and  the areas that subsequently became Italy ? Or Greece ? Or southern France ? 

IIRC, it was around 800 BC when the Egyptians met the Greeks - officially met with documented evidence, anyway.

There wasn't an actual "Greece" then or before that, so they wouldn't have thought of it that way.

Harte

[kmt_sesh]

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

 

Oooh right.. thanks for that folks. 

Umm.. however... is there any evidence of trade or interaction between .. say.. ancient Egypt and  the areas that subsequently became Italy ? Or Greece ? Or southern France ? 

There was definitely interaction between Egypt and Greece, as far back as the Mycenaean period. The material culture (things they produced and traded) of both groups are found in both places. These include some luxury goods that were ideal for trade of gift exchanges. Much the same is true for the Minoans and Egyptians. There are signs of interaction, although lesser, between ancient Italy and Egypt, perhaps from as far back as the 7th century BCE. For example, the largest extant collection of Etruscan writing was found in a secondary capacity as mummy wrappings in Egypt. Ancient Italian interactions with Egypt became much more robust in the Roman period, of course.

The only examples I can think of from Europe (beyond Greece and Italy) are things Roman soldiers brought with them on military campaigns, such as little statues of Bes, the ancient Egyptian household protective god. This is probably also how so many little Eiffel tower knickknacks ended up in Egyptian contexts. Tourists, you know. Okay, I made up that one.