Newsgroup sci.archaeology 46584

Directory

piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski) writes:
>In article  ayma@tip.nl writes:
>>The Minoan scripts and that of Phaistos are Anatolian in decent,
That is not  unreasonable, but, I would consider that is a hypothesis, 
just like the language. 
>>but in the case of Linear A it was used to write a Semitic language.
>>The references I gave, Best&Woudhuizen;, make that clear.
>>So there is no contradiction between your statement about script and
>>Henry's opinion about language.
Just to clarify, I quoted Gordon, and gave some of his opinions. 
I don't have  any position on what the language is. I do think that a 
good case has been made for a significant number of Semitic words, which 
is not the same thing at all.
And, I think the likely  situation is that the Minoans were culturally 
and linguistically mixed, and I doubt that identifing the underlying 
language would do much to clarify that. In fact, it might confuse it. (In 
that many of the influences, which might be more important than the 
"source," would be minimized.)
>>Btw thanks for the reference - I had always been looking for such a
>>script family tree!
>I would personally prefer to refer to notion that Linear A was used to write a 
>Semitic language as a hypothesis, as it has not been generally accepted and 
>there are many unanswered questions that have still to be dealt with before it 
>is accepted as fact.  The works of Best and W have not convinced many, so far.
Henry Hillbrath

Xina  wrote:
>Can any of you substantiate or refute a rumour that I have heard floating 
>around?  
>
>
>Supposedly, the Egyptian authorities have found the tomb of a pharaoh near 
>the
>Valley of the Kings in the ancient capital Luxor, the government
>newspaper al-Ahram said. The pharaoh has not yet been identified but
>he belonged to the 19th dynasty, which ruled Egypt between 1320 and
>1200 BC, the "silver age" of the pharaonic empire.
>
>Is there any truth to this rumour.  I havent herd anything lately and I 
>was given a bogus web site with the message in one of my mail lists.  Does 
>anyone have any idea as to who the Pharaoh found may be or if there is any 
>truth to this rumour?  Ive been away for a while. 
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Xina
>
>
Dear Xina,
I too have seen references to this suppossed find. There are problems 
with it. Some  claim the find is in Qurna OUTSIDE the Valley of the 
Kings. Some say two columns are at the entrance to the tomb with statues 
of the king and queen on or forming the columns. And a spiral stair case 
leading down to the burial chamber! All unlikeky and unprecedented. Maybe 
Saida can help with the next problem. The pharaoh of this tomb is from 
Dynasty 19. Are we missing any burial sites for any king of the 19th 
Dynasty? Some of my sources believe it is an internet fraud. What do you 
all think?
-- 
Greg Reeder
On the WWW
at Reeder's Egypt Page
---------------->http://www.sirius.com/~reeder/egypt.html
reeder@sirius.com

It's been 6 years since the passage of the Repatriation Act, whereby 
Native American remains and artifacts held by federally funded 
institutions must be made available for reburial or return to Native 
American groups. 
I'm curious what the effect this has had on anthropologists and 
archaeologists specialising in the study of Native American prehistory. 
Overall, has this hindered/helped Anthropological studies? Has the NAGPRA 
increased dialogue between Native Americans and Anthropologists? 
Susan 
-- 
                                             susansf@netcom.com

Paul,
Your post has numerous errors.
Paul Pettennude (tekdiver@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: One major point to consider here and one which is going to raise a
: great deal of further debate is the fact that nobody was building
: major ocean going craft at the time Mesoamerican civilizations were
: forming. 
This is obviously incorrect. The Polynesians had ocean-going craft at 
least 4000 years ago. Here are exerpts from a post I posted only a few 
days ago:
********
Date: 12 Sep 1996 18:12:02 GMT
Around 1200 B.C, a new wave of Polynesians, the Lapita ware peoples, was
settling the Western islands (Fiji, etc.). They were making a major
expansionary push. 
Enc. Brit. (1992) has a long and useful article about Pacific Islands (v. 
25). What it says is that around that time the peoples of the Lapita ware
culture were sufficiently advanced to engage in long ocean voyages. 
(Their heartland was in the Bismarck Archipelago, closer to New Guinea.)
Sophisticated water craft (most likely single hulled) was available
around 4000 years ago. (p. 245) 
So there's nothing that would have prevented those people from arriving
to S. American coast (not necessarily a planned expedition).
********
: Take a look at those Polynesian
: craft--count the oars. 
They had very sophisticated sail-boats.
: It's a long way from Hawaii to the mainland. 
: That's basically where the transmigration stopped.  
Hawaii had nothing to do with it at that time. They travelled among 
islands much further south.
: The Polynesians did most of their travel on
: calm seas. 
This is one of the strangest statements I've seen for a while in these 
groups... The Pacific is a "calm sea"? Really, Paul...
: The ocean from their closest point of contact was mild
: compared to the North Pacific route and much colder.  I don't think
: they had the clothes to survive in the North Pacific if they wanted
: to.
Clothes? They could build boats, but could not make clothes?
: Doesn't anybody out there read history anymore? 
I sure hope they do... and that includes you...
: This is the stuff of
: WRITTEN records, not the realm of fantastic speculation. 
Enc. Brit. is engaging in fantastic speculations?
: Please
: remember, first and foremost, I am an underwater archaeologist and
: the travel you are speculating about is something I have spent the
: last 30 years studying. 
So, it looks like we have here one more specialist showing himself to be
sadly misinformed... 
: I would love to find evidence of contact. 
There's evidence aplenty, Paul, if you only open your mind and look at 
it. I've posted plenty of useful bibliography here. Look at my webpage. 
Yours,
Yuri.
            =O=    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto    =O=
  --- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku ---
I am not young enough to know everything   ===   Oscar Wilde

merlin@mail.pe.net (Rick Smith) wrote:
+ You can obtain a copy of Charles Hapgood's book "Maps 
+of the Ancient Sea Kings" at a library.  The book contains 
+a good reprorduction of Piri Reis' map.
+ 
+ You will, most likely, get responses that run down the 
+map and Hapgood.  Do your own reading and research 
+and draw your own conclusions.
The reason that there are so many responses that "run down" 
Dr. Hapgood that virtually all of the evidence that Dr. Hapgood 
offers for his theories has been either disproved or shown to be 
inaccurate.  At the time that Dr. Hapgood developed his theories,
little, if anything was known about the geology of Antarctica, 
the world’s oceans, and the Earth’s interior.  Literally thousands, 
of peer-reviewed papers on the geomorphology and Quaternary 
geology of Antarctica, plate tectonics, and other aspects of 
geology have been published since Dr. Hapgood wrote his book. 
Unfortunately, this immense amount of data that has been 
collected since he wrote his books universally contradicts
his ideas to the point that they can be considered disproved.  
People like Mr. Hancock can make a case for Dr. Hapgood's 
ideas only by pretending that these studies and their results
as documented in hundreds, if not thousands, of peer-reviewed 
papers simply don’t exist.
Before accepting anything he says as true, it is best to make a
detailed review of his claims.  This involves not a search of 
on-line web pages which often contain more fiction, then fact, 
about the theories of Dr. Hapgood.  Rather, one has to go into 
the libraries and look at the research that has been done that
is related to his claims.
I and others have discussed Hapgood in innumerable posts.
A number of them can found using Deja News archive at:
http://www.dejanews.com/forms/dnq.html
Some keywords to use:
"Oronteus Finaeus"          "Antarctica" and "Fingerprints"
"Antarctica" and "FOG"    "Antarctica" and "MOM"
"Hapgood" and "Sea Kings"  "Hapgood" and "Hancock"
"Bauche map"   "Lt. Colonel" and "Ohlmeyer"
and many more.
Have Fun,
Paul V. Heinrich           All comments are the
heinrich@intersurf.com     personal opinion of the writer and
Baton Rouge, LA            do not constitute policy and/or
                           opinion of government or corporate
                           entities.  This includes my employer.
To persons uninstructed in natural history, their country 
or seaside stroll is a walk through a gallery filled with 
wonderful works of art, nine-tenths of which have their faces
turned to the wall.
- T. H. Huxley

Mark C. Hunter (mhunter@morgan.ucs.mun.ca) wrote:
: Would it be fair to say that the Greeks took over or ruled - directly or
: otherwise - Egypt from about 332 BC to 30BC (Not sure on the end date)? 
I'd probably phrase it somewhat differently:  The ruling house of Egypt
was Greek from about 332 BC (Alexander the Great) to 30 BC (Cleopatra IX /
Julius Caesar).
"Took over" is a little strong.  It implies a military invasion to me.
In reality, Alexander the Great simply liberated Egypt from the Persians.  
For the time of his life, Egypt was a part of his *Hellenistic* Empire,
bit with his death the empire was divided into four regions.  Egypt was
Hellenistic (meaning Greek) but it was also Egyptian, so that Ptolemaic
(after Ptolemy, Alexander's Governor in charge of Egypt) is the term
applied to Egypt at this time.
The Ptolemaic Period is the blending of Hellenistic Greek and Egyptian 
customs in art, language, religion, etc.  "Took over" just doesn't work
in this case.
C.E.S. Boulis

	Amid the talk of Highlander Clan and Norman diversions on the 
discussion of the derivation of 'Robert the Bruce', it seems to me, glaringly 
obvious that the name Robert, itself, is almost certainly Germanic, tied thus 
either to Saxon or 'Lallander' Scots, and as such, is likely not tied 
directly to any Norse, Highlander Gaelic, or Norman French tradition, but to 
tradition surviving through the English Lowlanders.  Although now 'American' 
primarily of Scottish descent, I spent the formative decades of my life in a 
fairly rural part of Germany, and recall an importance even now on extended 
family, similar to 'Clan' structure in the form of 'Stamm', such that one 
leading figure could easily be called 'the Such-And-Such' of the family 
'Such-and-Such' very much as was discussed.  But that still baffles me, as 
'Bruce' or 'Brus' don't seem Germanic...
*shrug*

Would it be possible for anyone to direct me to good publications dealing
with Angkor Wat or Angkor Thom... or any other Khmer sites, for that matter.
Also, I would be very grateful to anyone who can recommend any good basic
Archaeology texts, or advanced texts, to me.  I have read Stiebing's 
_Uncovering the Past_ and Fagan's _Archaeology_, but is there anything
else of general interest? Or do I have to move to specialized texts?
Angstboy in (the) Pitt

In article <51fqe9$s3f@news.tcd.net>,
	dwashbur@wave.park.wy.us (Dave Washburn) wrote:
>"littlejo@comm.net"  wrote:
>
>
>>Subject: Re: Noah's Ark Rebuttal (part 1) - Rev. Baugh
>>Distribution: world
>
>>Newsgroups: sci.archaeology-news@newsbase.cs.yale.edu
>>alt.archaeology-news@newsbase.cs.yale.edu
>
>>On Mon, 09 Sep 1996, Doug Weller 
>> stated
>>In article <50vctq$1i4@news.tcd.net>
>><       dwashbur@wave.park.wy.us (Dave Washburn) wrote:
>><> pspinks@vegauk.co.uk (Paul Spinks) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>><>And people should believe you as opposed to
>><>someone else because...?
>
>>>>
>>His phony credentials and unsubstantiated and false
>>claims are well documented in published articles and
>>web pages.
>
>[more snip]
>
>I find it interesting that nobody seems to want to answer my actual
>question...shall I try it again?  I have no reason to believe Baugh,
>and I never said I did.  My question is, why should I believe Paul
>Spinks over someone else?
Turn your question around.  Why shouldn't you believe him?  Has he 
ever lied to you or anyone else that you know of? 
He isn't documented as lying about his credentials and he isn't 
trying to sell you a video of his "finds".
Regards,
August Matthusen