Subject: Re: Sitchin, Hancock and Bauval on Art Bell tonight (9/27/96)
From: Baron Szabo
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 00:02:01 -0700
August Matthusen wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Again, how does Gauri et al explain the vertical fissures that appear on
> > the Sphinx well above the pit enclosure?
>
> These would probably be part of the "...two sets of intersecting, nearly
> vertical, irregulary spaced joints." (page 123)
Uh, maybe. What caused those?
> > Also, how is the roughly 400 year period (according to the show) of
> > weathering, between its creation and restoration, accounted for. The
> > show showed about 2.5 to 3 feet of weathering in that time, and stated
> > that Egyptologists account for it as weathering within about 400 years.
> > Do you think this is correct?
>
> I'm not exactly sure what is being asked here or upon exactly what
> information this query is based.
Well I wouldn't bet anything important upon what the info was based on.
Reread the quote from my previous post for the answer...
> Is this supposed to be 2.5 to 3
> feet of material eroded from the original shape to a degraded shape
> which is then restored?
Yes, correcto.
Is the show claiming that this much
> erosion couldn't have occurred in the 400 years from the conventional
> chronology?
Yes, correcto.
> How did they know what the outline of the original shape
> was?
I guess they were assuming that since it required restoration (along one
part of a side), it had been restored to a previous shape. In reality,
I don't know.
> How did they know whether or not additional material was removed by the
> restorers during the restoration? Could you clarify this, Peter?
Why would they remove more material only to restore it again?
> Something else to think about: if Schoch's weathering profile is
> supposed to be from the time when rainfall was the *incredibly high*
> rate of 10 to 20 inches per year (how much rain do you get in BC?),
[probably similar]
> then why didn't the later restoration destroy that weathered profile?
I would think that the restored section is a seperate part from the
heavily weathered parts. And I don't think it did destroy the weathered
profile, as in the show they were looking at a part of the restored
section that had been dismantled, revealing the 2.5 to 3 feet of
weathering between original and restoration.
Clearly I need to read more about the Sphinx before I can hope to
productively discuss it. :)
> I've never seen this wonderful show, just read Schoch's work and much
> of the other work.
Have you seen as much as you've read? ;)
--
zoomQuake - A nifty, concise listing of over 200 ancient history links.
Copy the linklist page if you want! (do not publish though)
----------> http://www.iceonline.com/home/peters5/
Subject: Hancock and Incas
From: black@black.tnt.it (Bolognese Luca)
Date: 6 Oct 1996 21:25:33 GMT
Hi,
I'm reading Hancock's "Fingerprints of the Gods".I'm not too
expert in archeology. The man is trying to demostrate
that there was an ancient people before 4000 B.C. with a
good tecnology and these guys influenced both Incas,Maya,Atzec,
Olmec,Egyptian and Babylonian peoples.Look strange?It is !
Can you invalidate some of these sentences ?
NAZCA LINES
1. Native folks say they was done by Viracochas
2. We don't know when they was done.
3. The spider is a picture of the Orion costellation(Pitluga)
4. The spider is a ricinulei,only in Amazon river
5. Whales and monkeys are strange animals for the place
VIRACOCHA
6. He was white skinned and bearded man,a civilizator
7. Folks say the ancient Incas roads was done by Viracochas
8. He came after a flood in Titicacas lake
9. The man seems like Osiris,similar legends
SACSAHUAMAN AND MACHU PICCHU
9. How did they carry around Sacsahuaman big stones ?
10. Machu Picchu was build in 4000-2000 B.C.(Muller)
THIANUANCO AND TITICACA
11. Thianuanco was build in 15000 B.C.
12. Reed boats similar to Egyptian ones
13. Folks say the city was build by Viracochas
14. What's the function of Accapana ?
15. Kalasasaya is an astronomic observatory
16. El Fraile = Oannes in Egypt.Both civilizators.
17. What's in their hands ?
18. Cuvieronius,toxodont,shelidoterium,macrauchenia
(animals dead before 10000 B.C.) on Gateway of the Sun.
19. The GOS is not terminated
20. A comparison of stone walls in which the corner joints
are comprised of interlocked L-shaped blocks, "very
unusual," and "found only in Cuzco and Egypt."
21. Thianuanco was distroyed by raising waters of the lake
22. Evidence of tecnological agriculture near the city
23. Aymara is quite a computer language.With no exceptions.
It seems made by someone.
24. Crosses on the walls like Egiptian Ankhs
Send comments to black@tnt.it
--
+-----Don't follow leaders, just watch the parkingmeters ( B.Dylan) ----+
| ||
| Bolognese Luca E-mail: black@tnt.it |
| Via Pirandello 1A/30 ||
| Savona 17100 Phone: 039 19 805978 |
| Italy ||
| |
+-----You don't need a wheaterman to know the way the wind blows---+
Subject: Re: The Minoan Linear A Language?
From: Baron Szabo
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 01:32:22 -0700
Bill Grobbel wrote:
>
> > Awaiting the next wall...
> >
> No, actually, still the same wall. Let's get specific here.
>
> Compare pottery types from Minoan and Semitic sites of similar, or really
> any period: different materials; different styles; different design
> motifs; different manufacturing techniques. Where's your cultural
> connection? Are you saying they created a new pottery style to go along
> with the new language?
I am trying to infer that a *new* culture was created, sort of sneakily,
by Semite traders, maybe in cooperation with ancient Near Eastern rich
people with a thirst for adventure. The pottery is created by the poor
majority, and shouldn't be compared with anything. I am not big on the
idea of trying to prove things based on pottery styles, unless there is
a distinct match or borrowing, in which case a match can be made, but
nothing can be proven from an absence of a match-up.
And I still definitely stand by my two earlier points as instructional
in pointing out why your point don't rule out my theory.
As far as Near Eastern influence, it is there. I'm retreating from this
discussion,[thanks for humouring me] at least as far as providing
detailed point by point analysis of Near Eastern influence etc etc etc.
I tried to say this in the beginning...
Architecture influence: If you look at the different site plans from,
say, Knossos, Phaistos, and Zakro to that of Mari, and you take into
consideration the very different situations and needs of these places,
it isn't hard to see the possible (I'd say likely) influences.
The Mari site (and most Near Eastern ones) was designed from the outside
in, bent very heavily on the square defensive wall, and fitting the
buildings tightly into this wall. The peoples were different. The
religion was different. The agriculture and surroundings were
different.
Now, Cretan sites were built from the inside out. Having an abundance
of room, possibly for the first time in their experience. All the
things I mentioned in the above paragraph were different. Also, the
palace was unified with the temple. It's also possible they were
influences by Egyptian architecture. How does that fit my theory?
Minoan Crete could have been somewhat multicultural, sort of like Canada
today. Entrepreneurs may have flocked there, as long as they respected
the bull god...
> And, humor me, what are these "distinctly Near Eastern" things that are
> within early Minoan culture?
Sorry. No humour for you. My schoolwork must come first! If I'm going
to dig back through my Greek book it will be to study for the Midterm.
You are purporting a theory here, Baron Bub
> :), and you dismiss my objection to it with no proof, only a vague comment
> that these connections you *know* about are "well known and studied."
Look. There are many studies done on this subject. I'll see if I can
dig up a cite...
-*-time passes-*- [as I lose more sleep...]
;->
Quoting "A History of Ancient Greece, Nancy Demand, etc etc etc. p.44"
"The simularities of the Minoan palaces to palaces in the Near East and
the fact that the Old Palaces appear to have sprung up very suddenly in
about 1900 B.C. have naturally raised the question of Near Eastern
influence on the development of the palaces, and a variety of
interpretations of the type and degree of influence have been offered.
On the other hand, some scholars argue for independant development. We
will consider some of the arguments for each of these views.
"Perhaps the strongest case for Near Eastern influence is the sudden
appearance in Crete not only of palaces but of of a cluster of features
associated with the palatial buildings of the Near East, especially
Syria: monumental structures build in ashlar masonry, specialized
production, writing, and an extensive administrative system of seal
usage. A comparison of the palace at Mari in Syria with the Cretan
palace at Mallia reveals both simularities and differences.
[I didn't mention Mallia (should of though), but I explained reasons for
the architectural differences. I feel that my explanations nicely
account for a;; the differences that are now described...]
"Although the Minoan palaces share many features with the Near Eastern
palace as exemplified by Mari, there are some fundamental differences
that rule out a simple cookie-cutter model of influence. The most basic
architectural difference is that the palace at Mari was strongly
fortified; the defensive outer walls had priority and served as the
determinning factor for the interior plan or the palace. That is, the
palace was built from the outside.. [OK! That's ebough! Read about is
yourself!]"
End of quote.
- [semi related] At Tell ed-Daba'a, in Egypt, there's a frescoe
depicting Minoan bull-leaping. It is dated to the period of Hyksos rule
in Egypt (15th century bce)*. The Point: The Hyksos (a Semetic peoples)
were kicking ass at this time.
* [quoted from my book] The Hyksos were foreign princes, probably from
the Levant, who gained control of Egypt and ruled for about a century
from their capital in the delta. See Vronwy Hankey, "Egypt, the Aegaean,
and the Levant," Egyptian Archaeology 3 (1993),27-29.
It has been in my vast experience [ :) ] that ALL the friggin evidence
backs up my theory!!!! Hows about YOU provide some adverse evidence!
--
zoomQuake - A nifty, concise listing of over 200 ancient history links.
Copy the linklist page if you want! (do not publish though)
----------> http://www.iceonline.com/home/peters5/
Subject: Re: Galatians Re: Dear Patriotic Young Briton
From: jyeates@bga.com
Date: 7 Oct 1996 08:55:08 GMT
>Galatia was in what is now Turkey with some overlap into what is now Iraq,
>if I remember correctly. The Galatians were Celts, who had moved down
>c.500bc to serve originally as mercenaries for some Greek War, and then
>decided to stay. I think they were to fight the Persians or ..
after a major keltoi invasion of Greece and Macedonia broke apart , 20,000
warriors were employed as mercenaries by Nicomedes of Bithynia against
Antiochus of Syra, and were later (along with their families) granted lands in
what was later called Galatia, which was reinforced by later immigrations
>Whay Galatia sounds so familar, is cause St. Paul has a book/letter to
>them.
they (Galatians) were first keltoi peoples converted to christianity ...
'wolf
--
... The meek shall inherit the Earth
... And they will become food for the Morlocks
Subject: Re: 200 ton Blocks
From: Jiri Mruzek
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 21:41:13 -0700
Blair P Houghton wrote:
>
> Jiri Mruzek gives us all cause to
> believe that he is trolling:
> By the way, a million kilograms is 2200 tons. You didn't
> even tackle that one. So you say a thousand tons is all
> you can imagine.
A ton weighs 1,000 kilograms.. But, according to you, it weighs
454.54 kilograms. The rest of your discourse is similarly brilliant,
or it is dominated by thoughts like:
> Dimwit.
> ridiculous twat
> Get off the net you pointless waste of bandwidth.
> Or is chickenshit just another in the long
> list of scatological pejoratives that cake your
> toilet-paper personality?
> Nitwit.
> There's shit on your head -
> Why don't you put it back up your ass where it belongs?
> "If it wasn't Saturday, I wouldn't have time for this idiot."
Careful, Blair, before you know it, you'll have won the Nobel
for poetry. Though not exactly an irresistible force, obviously
you belong in the class of unmovable (and untouchable) objects.
J.M.
Subject: Re: Origins of Europeans..
From: Claudio De Diana
Date: 7 Oct 1996 13:23:26 GMT
grooveyou@aol.com (GROOVE YOU) wrote:
>Where are the Ancient european civilizations? ...Where did they
>originate? That is a question that european scientists should research
>and answer, Of course it is well known that they are not a ancient people,
>but , when did they come on the scene?...
Well, I suppose that this is a serious question and not
a flame bait so I will try to answer seriously.
Actually, given that it seems to me that, for reasons
quite obscure to me, you are interested to determine
if the europeans could be classified as "afro-black"
ethnicity I will point out only some sound and
pragmatical facts, i.e. how the first europeans painted
themselves in paintings (frescoes[*]) and mosaics.
The best examples of these were left by Etruschi
(a population in the central Italy - say "Toscana"
if you find a map with the name of the regions of Italy)
in their tombs. Then the Romani were so kind to leave us
also their detailed description of the people they met/fought;
so for example we know for sure that the Celti were
red-haired, pale white skin and very tall (this at least confirmed
by the bones founded). However take a look at the iconographic
sources of your local library and develop an opinion
on your own, also do tell me if you enjoied the etruschi
paintings; some of them are really wonderful.
As a matter of fact we can say that actually, particularly
the people of the mediterranean coast were quite "dark"
(as nowaday "arabs" look like) and that the "average european"
tended to standarize to a white colour for the mixing of the
southern with the northern population. However even
the darker examples of europeans[**] does not resemble
an "afro-black", I am neither a genetist nor a biologist
but I fell quite confident if I say that this is
a sign that "african" people and "european" people
were separated for a long time.
The trouble of where the "original ancestors" come
is different and very difficult, given that the deeper
you go in the past the less are the artifacts/skeletons
that you find. As a matter of fact I will tell you
that I have got no difficulties in accepting a common
ancestor based in Africa, Asia, Oceania or whatsoever
continent (warning!! except Atlantis, Mu and other
space-aliens related stuff).
But I get a little angry is when I see attempts
to negate evidence (ehm, I am referring to your
post on Otello, great drama but it could not be
taken as a proof of a presence of a
majority of black europeans in ->that<- time).
Best regards,
Claudio De Diana
P.S. Actually your original question sounds strange
to me:
> ...Where did they
>originate? That is a question that european scientists should research
>and answer, [snip]
well, paleoantropologist do this, but not only european
also asian, african, american and so on. As in all the part
of world we are aware of the attempt of paleoantropologist
to determine the most ancient part of the history of mankind.
I admit my ignorance about this subject; this happnes because I like
more to study the history of the people who left something written
(also because we are plenty of their relics and ruins) but this
is a matter of taste.
[*] if this is the right translation.
[**] This form an historical point of view :=) is it possible
to find lot of afro-black european citzien - nowadays - but it
is also possible to see that usually they are second or third
generation immigrants.
Subject: The Grotte Chauvet
From: Philip Benz <100575.2061@compuserve.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 14:30:01 +0100
I'm new here, but I may as well go ahead and post. Although I've been
on CIS for over a year, this netsurfing is new, so I hope I can make it
back to this site to check for responses.
Subject: Chauvet: climate at -32K
Fm: Philip Benz [100575.2061@compuserve.com]
To: All
RE Paleolithic Climate at 32,000 BP:
I'm writing about the Grotte Chauvet and need a few pointers concerning
climate. All the material I've got on hand about climate goes no further
back than the Solutreen (@20K BP), the period the Grotte Chauvet was
originally assumed to fit into, so until I can get round to more
research I thought I'd ask here. I assume 32K BP is also deep in the ice
age, but anything more specific about the climate and vegetation in the
Rhone river valley at that time would help.
As long as I'm at it, here are a few other questions:
1) Nearly all of my sources are in French, so I'm a little uncertain
what terms to use when refering to certain artifacts like stone tools.
Could someone post a brief list of the predominant tool forms associated
with Mousterian, Chatelperronien and Aurignacien culture? I'm also
unsure just where the Levallois technique falls -- late Mousterian?
2) The C14 dates for Chauvet are in the 30-32K BP range. Whether that
places the site within the Aurignacien, Chatelperronien or even
Mousterian cultural settings is open to question -- the paintings could
concievably even be the work of Neanderthal! Either that, or Neanderthal
and Cro-magnon cohabited the region, as in Qafzeh. Combier has proposed
dates of 31K and 27K BP for two Mousterian sites in Ardeche.
So the question is, could Neanderthal have been an artist too? Could
Chauvet be the work of Neanderthal art at its summit, and the torch
scrapings from some 5000 years later evidence of visits by Cro-magnon
learning his technique?
Any discussion or comments on Chauvet or parietal art in general
would be a *great* help.
Cheers, --- Phil
Subject: Re: Nomadic sedentism
From: Saida
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 09:01:26 -0500
Piotr Michalowski wrote:
>
> In article <539plt$205@shore.shore.net> whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) writes:
>
> >The difference is between thinking in process terms and simply
> >looking at the end result. The ideograms such as those on the
> >Palette of Narmer and the stele of Naram Sin which show the
> >symbol of the adze (phonetic "mr") make clear that the building
> >of canals and walled cities was viewed as a process requiring
> >organization and leadership. Building was a verb, not just a noun.
> >
>
> What ideograms on the stela of Naram-Sin are you talking about? I do not even
> bother to deal with your novel interpretions of of beth, "house," which will
> surprise millions of speakers of a language you do not know--Hebrew. (snip)
I don't know whether Steve knows Hebrew or not, but I know I do and he
is correct about the "beth" or "house" business as being used in a wider
sense than just the "architectual" :-) as in "Bet David", the "house of
David", meaning his dynasty, all his relations and, ultimately, all of
Israel. Later on, after the split of Israel into two kingdoms,
Samaria-Israel was long referred to by foreigners as "Bit Humri" or the
House of Omri.
Subject: Re: No Moths Allowed (was Egyptian Tree Words)
From: Saida
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 09:22:56 -0500
Alan M. Dunsmuir wrote:
>
> In article <3256E687.2493@PioneerPlanet.infi.net>, Saida
> writes
> >I may be dense, but I can't quite get the connection between geese and
> >cloth.
>
> From the OED:
>
> [ME. gos(e)somer(e, app. f. goose n. + summer n. Cf. the synonymous Eng.
> dial. summer-goose (Craven), summer-colt, G. mädchensommer (lit. ‘girls’
> summer’), altweibersommer (‘old women’s summer’); also G. sommerfäden,
> Du. zomerdraden, Sw. sommartråd, all literally ‘summer thread’.
> The reason for the appellation is somewhat obscure. It is usually
> assumed that goose in this compound refers to the ‘downy’ appearance of
> gossamer. But it is to be noted that G. mädchen-, altweibersommer mean
> not only ‘gossamer’, but also a summer-like period in late autumn, a St.
> Martin’s summer; that the obs. Sc. go-summer had the latter meaning; and
> that it is in the warm periods of autumn that gossamer is chiefly
> observed. These considerations suggest the possibility that the word may
> primarily have denoted a ‘St. Martin’s summer’ (the time when geese were
> supposed to be in season: cf. G. Gänsemonat ‘geese-month’, November),
> and have been hence transferred to the characteristic phenomenon of the
> period. On this view summer-goose (which by etymologizing perversion
> appears also as summer-gauze) would be a transposition.]
> --
> Alan M. Dunsmuir
My dictionary says about the same. You say that "it is usually assumed
that goose in this compound refers to the "downy" appearance of
gossamer". Are you referring to the cloth here or just what? I have a
lot of dresses made out of various fabrics, but none of them, thank God,
has a "downy" appearance like the down of geese. My point was if
"gossamer" came from "goose-summer" or "St. Martin's summer" that is
fine, but you have to admit that the connection from goose to summer to
the kind of cloth that is worn in summer is kind of odd. What, exactly,
is the "summer-thread"? The down lying about? Cobwebs? And what do
the young girls and old women, do you suppose have to do with it all?
Are they spinning it--wearing it? It seems to me that the above-quoted
were something written by either myself or Steve Whittet, you guys would
tell us to have our heads examined.
Subject: Re: A State of Denial, or finding it hard to accept the facts: was Re: Linguistic diffusion: was Re: Egyptian Tree Words
From: Saida
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 09:40:49 -0500
Piotr Michalowski wrote:
>
> In article <32582FE5.532D@PioneerPlanet.infi.net> Saida writes:
>
> For the
> >last time, I do not believe Egyptian is an IE language--no more do I
> >believe it is a Semitic one or Afro-Asiatic.
>
> I can undertand that you do not believe Egyptian is not IE, that is a relief
> to know. What I do not understand is on what basis do you go against the
> universal linguistic opinion that Egyptian is indeed an independent branch of
> Afroasiatic. I assume that you have reasons for this.
As you may have noticed, I am not much impressed by "universal
linguistic opinion", if there really is such a thing, or I would never
have offered the observation that I see a good deal in ancient Egyptian
that looks like IE. Because of this, I am very suspicious of any
classification of this language. Not only that, but I am most wary of
some of what is nowadays "universal linguistic opinion" of the
pronunciation or value of the hieroglyphs. Additionally, as I am well
out of the academic or controlled study of Egyptian, I have no reason to
worry about its classification among the world languages. In other
words, I have no one to tell me what I must believe in order to pass
tests or get a degree. To me, it is just "Egyptian", the study of which
has become a fascinating and enlightening hobby. The more I learn, the
more it surprises me.
Subject: Re: Sumerian vocabulary analysis (was: Re: More monkey business)
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 11:25:28
In article seagoat@primenet.com (John A. Halloran) writes:
>From: seagoat@primenet.com (John A. Halloran)
>Subject: Re: Sumerian vocabulary analysis (was: Re: More monkey business)
>Date: 6 Oct 1996 11:46:01 -0700
>In article piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
>writes:
>>In
>>addition, your initial premise, that Sumerian is somehow a new, invented
>>language, that is younger than any other,
>This is actually the opposite of what I believe. Actually, I believe that
>when its inventors created Sumerian over 10,000 years ago, they had no
>exposure to other spoken languages, so it is likely to have been one of the
>first spoken languages, if not the first. I don't think that linguists can
>prove any language family to be older than 10,000 years old.
>I actually think that a standard interpersonal symboling system was not needed
>until relative strangers began living together in settled communities.
I am sorry if I misunderstood your position. I still think that this goes
against everything we have learned from contact linguistics. Why would
Sumerian be the one language not to have contact with others? Why would it be
10,000 years old. I think that you misconstrue the arguments mad by Campbell
and others that current comparative linguistics, as used to reconstruct
Proto-IE, AA, etc. cannot go back more than 10 or 12 thousand years. That is
why the new groups that are working on Nostratic and other larger and older
formations have tried to do things in other ways. One can agree with this or
that, and one has to keep in mind that much has changed in this kind of
research since Illich-Svitich and his disciples started the whole thing, but
it would be difficult to argue that human language is only 10 thousand years
old or that Sumerian represents the only one that is, was "invented" by people
who somehow missed out for millennia on natural language, or that the language
had no input from the outside. First of all, you are rummaging around, rather
blindly, in secondary literature on a language that was primarily written when
it was already dead, and you refuse to recognize that it might have looked a
little different than we represent it through a conventional transliteration
and also from the phonological conventions of Akkadian language scribes.
ALso, since you do not really understand the languages and cultures of
Mesopotamia, you cannot evaluate the various claims made. An example is your
post on toponyms, which relies on eccentric etymologies that have not been
accepted in the field, for good reason.
Subject: Re: JURASSIC PARK!!!
From: Steve Russell
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:49:39 -0500
Because the dodo bird is unlikely to eat the tourists?
Steve Russell
On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Bas Kammenga wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know why they try to rebuild dinosaurs from millennia ago,
>
> and not try it first with lately died species like the DODO??
>
> It must be even more simple to rebuild the DNA from a mouse or a rat,
>
> so why don't they try this first, before beginning with the "BIG" work??
>
> Cheers,
> Bas
>
>
Subject: Re: Mr. Whittet's Linguistic Idiocies
From: malloy00@io.com (MA Lloyd)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 09:02:28 -0500
Saida writes:
>MA Lloyd wrote:
>> Huh? So far as I know nobody has ever maintained that Egyptian was
>> closer to IE than Semitic was to IE.
>Well, that is too bad because it is!
Proof by repeated assertion?
> Its now quite agreed they are
>> coordinate branchs of Afro-asiatic, and the earlier classifications of
>> Egyptian in Hamitic usually maintained that Hamitic was a mixture of
>> Semitic and West Sudanic or some other proposed family of Africa, not IE.
>I'll bet it's NOT agreed. Anyway, Piotyr M. says that the term
>"Hamitic" is out-of date.
It is. Did you bother to read my original post, my reply to the first
time you replied to exactly this same message or any of the information
on Afroasiatic other people posted? Read it again, its a historical point.
>> >The Egyptians used "iti" or "tef" for "father". "Teftef" evidently was
>> >"grandfather". I don't know when one or the other was called for, if
>> >both terms were interchangeable or what. Later on, it appears, the
>> >Semitic "abba" was also used. Strangely, if the "f" and the "t" were
>> >reversed in "tef", we'd have something. The word for "mother", of
>> >course, is "mut", which is very IE. "Muti" means "my mother".
>Why do you people insist
>upon ignoring everything really interesting that I've posted and just
>pick at the most insignificant--like what I called my parents as a
>child?
Maybe because you offered it in your post like it was evidence of something
and I had not read enough of your posts to realize you didn't really care
about evidence? Ah well I know better now.
--
-- MA Lloyd (malloy00@io.com)
Subject: Re: Advanced Machining in Ancient Egypt?
From: rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R. Gaenssmantel)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 15:09:05 GMT
Rodney Small (rsmall@erols.com) wrote:
: Stella Nemeth wrote:
[...]
: > They weren't built using bronze saws. They were built using wet
: > wooden wedges to split the stone and rope dipped in something sticky
: > and then into sand for sawing stone and round rocks used as hammers to
: > finish the stone. And lots of sand, of course, as a polishing medium.
: >
: > I haven't studied the subject heavily, but the books I've seen
: > generally point out that bronze tools are not particularly useful when
: > working stone, but stone tools (including that sandy rope for sawing
: > stone) are very useful.
: >
: > Stella Nemeth
: > s.nemeth@ix.netcom.com
: Whatever the tools used, it's obvious that was has been found is totally
: inadequate to explain the vast amount of work done at Gizeh. Moreover,
: this thread is directed at one particular artifact. So far, there have
: been several caustic comments, but no one has attempted an alternative
: explanation to the ultrasonic machining hypothesis set forth by Dunn.
: Does anyone have one?
Given that you actually found Stella's post - and quoted it - I'm surprised
that you can't read it. Otherwise you wouldn't ask this question.
Also, what makes you so sure about US tools? Have you found any? Why not - say
- lasers, masers, phasers? Or how about electron, ion, molecular beams? Maybe
sandblasting (put the stones in a dessert storm)??
Ralf
--
Subject: Re: ** Decimation of American Indians By European Disease **
From: Paula.Sanch@emich.edu (Paula Sanch)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 15:18:16 GMT
spryder@sprynet.com (Stephen P Ryder) wrote:
>I am doing research at the moment on how disease spread throughout North
>America eradicating hundreds of thousands of Indians whose immune systems
>could not combat European sicknesses. I am hoping to specialize on how the
>American Indian diet affected their immune systems, as well as the spread of
>disease in general after European contact.
>If anyone has any information on this, especially recent studies/findings,
>please feel free to share it with the group or with me directly over e-mail at
>spryder@sprynet.com -- thank you!
I think that you should start by checking nutrition research; that
will give you a better handle than immunity research (not to mention
being a heckuva lot easier; immunology is desperately complex and
painfully hard to grasp. If you insist, try starting with the
Scientific American annual edition on immunology a couple of years
ago; it gives a good overview on the field.).
In general, any population which has a diet not deficient in major
food groups OR *calories*, there is no immune deficit. The reason, as
generally accepted to date, why Native Americans were so vulnerable to
European pathogens was that they had no previous exposure to those
pathogens - excluding smallpox, which was also a great killer of
Europeans, the ones which killed the greatest numbers were what we
term "childhood diseases" (e.g., measles, mumps). It is still true
that these are very much more dangerous diseases to anyone, of any
ethnic background or health history who contracts them as an adult,
rather than as a child. For example, mumps usually sterilizes adults
who contract it.
Other diseases which are still dangerous to adults, but rarely fatal
to children, have been either eradicated (for all practical purposes)
or are prevented by vaccination. Every disease you can imagine, from
tuberculosis to scarlet fever (and, of course, including the
previously mentioned ones) was opportunistically used by settlers
against natives.
I think that the fact that most of the diseases used are still highly
dangerous for adults who contract them tends to deal a rather
overwhelming blow to your hypothesis. Sorry!
Paula.Sanch@emich.edu
-----------------------------
"We can disagree without being disagreeable."
(Sis. Mickey Eaton, a southern Pentecostal)
Subject: Re: Mr. Whittet's Absurdities about Migrations...
From: rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R. Gaenssmantel)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 15:25:11 GMT
Steve Whittet (whittet@shore.net) wrote:
[...]
: The question is why would people from Cental Asia want to
: migrate to Turkey in the first place? Once you realise that
I don't think this question appropriate for any half educated adult. Why would
the Turks start migrating? For exactly the same reasons that caused all
migartions: Hunger! All the migration movemants in Europe and Asia (and most
likely in any other part of the world) can be traced to famines (caused by
several dry years or desaters). One people would suffer and decide to go for
new land - however, that was already claimed by others. The restult were wars,
peoples displaced and chased out of their land, moving on and doing the same to
others. Read up on the great migartions and you'll see yourself.
: there is a major trade route from the Namazga culture across
: the Caspian to what is to the Kura or Aras river leading to
: Mt Arat as documented by a line of closely associated sites
: dating to the 3rd millenium BC it seems simplistic to hypothesis
: this had no role in the decision making process.
Well, actually it didn't. When you're pushed out of your land you go to werever
else you think is reasonably fertile - otherwise you'll have a hard time
surviving.
: > If you can speak Turkish you can basically talk and understand
: >all the Turkic peoples between Turkey and West China.
: That is because of a much later development called the Silk Road
: which provides a mechanism connecting these peoples together.
That's in a word crap! Turkic peoples originated in central Asia. Thats where
the Turks initially came from, and that's why the Kirgises (sp) and Uigurs
(sp?) speak (and spoke!) Turkic languges - which are up to the present day so
similar, that you can actually talk in Turkish to these people. Only problem:
make sure if you do it in western China that there are no Chinese officials
around, since the government is trying to supress these peoples cultures.
: > There was no need for trade links to spread the same language
: >between related peoples - connections help keep it up, but they
: >were'nt necessary for establishing it.
: The question is what relation can you produce prior to the
: 3rd millenium BC when the trade route appears?
Ever thought about common ancestory of related peoples??
Ralf
: >
: >Ralf
: >
: >: >--
: >: >Loren Petrich
: >
: >: steve
: >
: >
: >--
: steve
--
Subject: Re: Mr. Whittet's Absurdities about Migrations...
From: rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R. Gaenssmantel)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 15:29:37 GMT
Steve Whittet (whittet@shore.net) wrote:
[...]
: Most migrations follow a pattern. First someone goes and explores
: a new territory and comes back and reports on the opportunities
: that exist there. "The grass is greener, the trees are higher, the
: climate is milder, the game is more plentiful, the rivers are full
: of fish, there are riches for the taking, gold and silver and tin,
: the women there are beautiful; come back with me and see for yourself."
: So people go back and forth a bit and pretty soon there is both a
: known route as to how to get there and there are some kin established
: in the area. People migrate, when they have kin established in the area.
: Usually that process takes a minimum of several centuries.
: Here we have established a connection going back at least a millenia.
: The route is not an overland route but a water route across the Caspian
: Sea and up the Aras river to the region of Mt Arat.
I don't think this adventurous hypothesis is worthwhile commenting upon.
Ralf
: steve
--
Subject: Re: A Sketch of Proto-Indo-European
From: mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 15:53:21 GMT
Harald Hammarstrom wrote:
>> Noun endings:
>>
>> IE had at least two genders, common and neuter, of which the first was
>> split into masculine and feminine for most of the branches. The neuter
>> gender, where it exists, always follows the Neuter Law of accusative
>are you sure about this ? I read somewhere that the two "original"
>genders were masc and fem and that the neuter had at some point broken
>out of masc and that's why their case systems resemble each other
No. PIE (as still seen in Hittite) distinguished animate and
inanimate. The case endings were similar, neuters just didn't have a
nominative [inanimate nouns couldn't be the subject of a sentence].
The feminine gender emerged later, as a split-off from the masculine,
by adding on -H ( > -a:).
I'm guessing that the story you read was about the Romance languages,
where there are only two genders, masc. and fem., and where the neuter
at some point became merged with the masc. because their case systems
resembled each other.
==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
mcv@pi.net |_____________|||
========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
Subject: Re: No Moths Allowed (was Egyptian Tree Words)
From: mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal)
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 15:53:22 GMT
Saida wrote:
>Plus, I saw a phrase "annointed with the water of "ankam" flowers". It
>brought to mind the camomile water my mother used to use as a general
>panacea. It was drunk for a stomach ache or applied topically in a
>soaked cloth to any inflammation. I wasn't crazy about it as a kid, but
>it seemed to work. (BTW, I wasn't born B.C. as I know it is starting to
>seem, but well after WW II). My dictionary says "camomile" comes from
>the Greek "chamaimelon" or "earth apple", but I know camomile comes from
>little, delicate, daisy-like flowers, rather like the determinative in
>the Egyptian "ankam".
My mother used "camomilla" as a general panacaea too. I've always
quite liked the taste, actually. Anyways, when I discovered that it
was called "manzanilla" in Spanish, I was a bit surprised as well.
But that's the way it is.
==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
mcv@pi.net |_____________|||
========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
Subject: Re: Chariots of da Gods?!!
From: Kathy McIntosh
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:38:02 +0100
In article <844457579snz@bozzie.demon.co.uk>, "Paul C. Dickie"
writes
>In article <91e7cc$151219.19@news.comet.net> timmac@comet.net writes:
>
>>pcd@bozzie.demon.co.uk ("Paul C. Dickie") wrote:
>>
>>>The most recent news from Von Daniken is that he has been quoted in a Swiss
>>>newspaper (sorry folks -- no idea which!) as having predicted that a large
>>>mothership will land in the next decade and that Earth is already under
>>>surveilance from scout ships launched from the mothership, as the aliens
>>>assess the risks from war and pestilence. For some reason, he seemed to have
>>>completely overlooked the dangers to any self-respecting Centaurian of close
>>>exposure to daytime television...
>
>Or, for that matter, to Aussie soap-operas like "Neighbours"...
>
>>>Once the dangers have been assessed and the Earth is classified as "harmless"
>>>or "mostly harmless", Von D thinks that the mothership will land and the
>>>aliens demand to be taken to the UN and also to "world leaders".
>>
>>Notice how this provides him a convenient loophole when the mother
>>ship does NOT make its appearance?
>
>I *had* noticed. Perhaps he had learned something from the way that the former
>UK sports commentator and Prophet of the Turquise Tracksuit, David Icke, first
>declared that he was the Son of God and then that the world would come to an
>end some four or five years ago. Promptly ridiculed in the press as "David,
>the Son of Icke", he somehow seemed to lose credibility as the Big Day came
>and, er, went...
>
>Quem Deus perdere vult, dementat prius?
>
>< Paul >
>
>
He not only lost his credibility, he lost his mind! In fact he had a
nervous breakdown. So, in a sense, the world as he knew it did come to
an end....
We occasionally see him on local TV, as he lives in the area. Now-a-
days he seems to be very anti any religion, and he no longer wears
turquoise.
--
Kathy McIntosh
Subject: Chinese ideograms and Mayan characters
From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 15:49:01 GMT
Dear Peter,
A while back, I promised to send you some refs in regard to the
theories that the Mayan writing system may have been based on some
Chinese prototypes. I have investigated this matter further, and I
must say that I found quite little work that has been done in this
area. Nevertheless, there's some...
Joseph Needham writes in TRANS-PACIFIC ECHOES:
That the pictographic and ideographic principle of the
scripts of the Meso-American people evoked the parallels
of the Old World, has been appreciated for nearly two
centuries. In 1813 Alexander von Humboldt wrote [about
it] ... (p. 16)
Also:
...the pictographic/ideographic principles might not
alone attain our collocative level [indicating
diffusion] if it were not for the squareness of the Maya
glyphs so much recalling Chinese, the reading order
which goes downwards in nearly all cases, and sometimes
right to left, and even indentations, recalling Chinese
practices. On the pictographic side some of the writings
from the Shih-chai Shan culture (4th to 1st centuries
bce) are notably similar to those of the Aztec codices
(Fig. 1) [the illustration at the back of the book shows
some Chinese ideograms remarkably similar to some of
Meso-American ones] By the same token, Meso-American
cylinder-seals recall those so common in ancient
Babylonia and the Indus Valley. (p. 16)
Needham gives the following further refs:
Chiang Khang-Hu, ON CHINESE STUDIES, (Shanghai: Com. Press, 1934).
p. 380.
E. C. Bunker, THE TIEN CULTURE AND SOME ASPECTS OF ITS RELATINSHIP
TO THE DONG-SON CULTURE, in EARLY CHINESE ART AND ITS POSSIBLE
INFLUENCE IN THE PACIFIC BASIN, ed. N. Barnard, (1974), p. 296.
R. C. Rudolph, REGIONAL REPORT: CHINA MAINLAND -- AN IMPORTANT DONG-
SON SITE IN YUNNAN [SHIH-CHAI SHAN], in ASIAN PERSPECTIVES
(Honolulu), 4 (no. 1), (1961), p. 47.
As you may notice, these books are not recent, and may not
necessarily be easily available. Nobody said these theories are
fashionable, and that they can find publishers easily. But they
exist.
Also, I would like to make it clear that I never claimed that
decisive proof exists that Mayan writing was derived from Asian
prototypes. All I said was that _some people_ suggested it. Such
evidence as exists is extremely intriguing and deserves further
investigation. I hope someone can research these matters further.
Yours truly,
Yuri.
#% Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto %#
-- a webpage like any other... http://www.io.org/~yuku --
The world is governed more by appearance than by realities, so
that it is fully as necessary to seem to know something as it
is to know it ========= Daniel Webster
Subject: Re: Mr. Whittet's Absurdities about Migrations...
From: rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R. Gaenssmantel)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 16:14:39 GMT
Steve Whittet (whittet@shore.net) wrote:
: In article , petrich@netcom.com says...
: >
: >In article <533hm5$r1m@shore.shore.net>,
: >Steve Whittet wrote:
: >>In article <532vl5$iul@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk says...
: >
: >>>Loren Petrich (petrich@netcom.com) wrote:
: >>>: Mr. Whittet shows yet again that he can *only* imagine contacts
: >>>: by trade along bodies of water.
: >
: >>>And we all know how busy a canal the Silk Route was.
: >
: >>Actually a major part of the silk was transported either by sea
: >>or using rivers. Caravans which crossed deserts did so to avoid
: >>the bandits which preyed on the trade taking the easier well
: >>established routes.
: >
: > Evidence? Central Asia is a rather arid place.
: There is quite a bit of evidence actually.The center of Iran
: is a huge salt desert called the Dasht e Lut in Khorasan.
: Start with the routes taken by Alexander the Great and
: by Marco Polo.
: Note how they generally follow rivers around the periphery of this
: desert where possible.
: When Alexanders army reached the Persian Gulf he built a fleet.
: In doing this he was following the lead of the Pharoah Neco 1
: who had the Phoenicians build a fleet for him in the Persian Gulf
: c 600 BC quarding the ancient trade routes of Dilmun
: to Makkan and Meluhha.
: Note the extent of the kingdoms of Persia, Media and Parthia.
: Follow the Arak river from the Caspian to the Herat river and
: it brings you through Parthia, Chorasmia and Aria to Bactria.
: This river was the modern border of Iran with the Soviet Union.
: It was the route Alexander followed from the Caspian through
: Parthia to Herat in Afghanistan. From Harat Alexander took the
: Harat to its headwaters at the Farah river north of the border
: of modern Pakistan then he followed the Farah to Bactria where
: the Oxus leads to the Aral Sea.
: Alexander then went as far north as the Jaxartes at Kokand
: before reversing his course and cutting across to the Indus
: at Taxila which he followed to the Arabian Sea where he meets
: the fleet of his admiral Nearchus who has sailed from Bashra
: to Harmozia or the straits of Hormuz at the mouth of the Sirjan
: river which leads up to Alexandria or Gulashkird which was the
: terminus of the return route of Craterus from Pattala at the
: mouth of the Indus.
: It is quite clear that Alexander and his generals and admirals
: are following well established trade routes and know where they
: can expect to make connections. Armies don't move anywhere
: without first scouting ahead and generals don't split their
: forces without planing where they will meet back up again.
: This indicates some foreknowledge of the route the expedition
: was to take.
: Alexanders expedition is the point at which the silk road
: appears to connect to Europe.
: Look at the Achaneid Empire at its greatest extent. Follow
: the migrations of the Tocharian (yueh-chi) later known as
: the Kushans c 100 BC and of the Sakas or Sakai c 130-100 BC
: These people were caught between the westward moving Huns
: and the eastward moving Scythians. By 350 AD the Huns reach
: the Oxus by way of the Jaxartus.
: These people come down the Jaxartes to Bactria on the Oxus
: then follow Alexanders route to the headwaters of the Indus.
: Now look at China in the same period. At the headwaters of
: the Yellow River the furthest extent of the Great wall of
: China to the west is at Yu-men Kuan. From there the river
: Tarim leads around the Takla Makan desert to the Amu Darya
: river leading to Bactria.
: To the north of this route is the Gobi Desert, to its south
: is the Takla Makan desert. to the south of the Takla Makan
: Desert the Yangtze river provides an alternative route to
: the Amu Dara and so does the Mekong. All their headwaters
: stem from the same source.
: Likewise the Ghanges coming upstream from Calcutta in the Bay
: of Bengal and the Indus share the same headwaters at Dehli.
: The Indus, Ghanges, Tarim, Oxus and Jaxartes rivers share the
: same headwaters in the Pamir Mountains. Basically, that's
: your silk road. In 814 AD the Tang Dnasty of Chinas western
: most extent is the headwaters of the Tarim in the Pamir mountains.
: The easternmost border of the Abbasaid caliphate meets it there.
: The sea routes down the south China Sea to Singapore, the Moluccas
: and Sumatra, around and later across the Bay of Bengal to Calcutta
: down the Indian coast to Ceylon up the Indian coast to the Indus,
: through the straits of Hormuz and up the Persian Gulf to Mesopotamia
: date from at least the third millenium BC.
: Each of these areas is well understood as a trade unit with its
: immediate neighbors, but for some reason the idea of a cargo reaching
: one port being transhipped to the next as the exotic merchandise of
: a far off realm seems to never have been considered.
: Melanesia has roots that go back to c 30,000 BC,
: There is Jomon pottery on Japan c 10,000 BC
: In the 3rd Millenium BC Dilmun, Makkan and Melluha trade with
: Mesopotamia.
: The bay of Bengal is linked to Indonesia by the Bang Song Drum
: Bronze trade.
: Calcutta is linked to Dehli by painted grey ware.
: Madagascar is settled from Indonesia c 2000 BC.
: The ports alonmg these coasts in the 3rd millenium BC are perhaps
: a days sail apart. It's really no big deal to keep passing the
: stuff along to the next guy. get the drift?
: >Loren Petrich
: steve
--
Subject: Re: No Moths Allowed (was Egyptian Tree Words)
From: "Alan M. Dunsmuir"
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:07:27 +0100
In article <32591240.16B9@PioneerPlanet.infi.net>, Saida
writes
>You say that "it is usually assumed
>that goose in this compound refers to the "downy" appearance of
>gossamer".
"I" didn't say anything. The Oxford English Dictionary said it all.
>Are you referring to the cloth here or just what?
Do you actually know what gossamer is, in an English context? Have you
ever walked through an English meadow in late suumer and seen it?
Perhaps I should have quoted the definition part as well as the
etymology.
"1. A fine filmy substance, consisting of cobwebs, spun by small
spiders, which is seen floating in the air in calm weather, esp. in
autumn, or spread over a grassy surface: occas. with a and pl., a thread
or web of gossamer."
--
Alan M. Dunsmuir
Subject: pharaoh drug use
From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date: 7 Oct 1996 16:12:30 GMT
I've been reading recently a fairly curious work, SAILING TO
PARADISE, 1994, by Jim Bailey. He also wrote GOD-KINGS AND THE
TITANS, 1973, that received quite a mixed reception in its time.
Suffice it to say that he is an extreme hyper-diffusionist and
believes that extensive across-the-ocean voyages and trade were the
rule before and during the Bronze Age, and petered out from the
beginning of the Iron Age. He tries to show that extensive pure
copper deposits from the Great Lakes area were exported to Europe
across the Atlantic around 5,000 years ago. These views are rather
extreme, and I'm quite sceptical about this, myself.
Did someone else read this book, and what do you think?
Now, one snippet of information from this book is curious, in light
of the recent discussion of Egyptian mummies, and drug use at that
time (re: cocaine and tobacco traces found in mummies).
"A botanist, Galletly Wilson, working in the Karamajong area of
Uganda, argues that tobacco, a native American plant, was used
across Africa as snuff long before the arrival of the Portuguese.
And that the indigenous American sweet potato was also in use in
Uganda before the days of Columbus." (p. 95)
Can anyone provide any info about the work of this Mr. Wilson?
Thanks in advance,
Yuri.
Subject: Re: The Aztecs Are Innocent (like Nazis?)
From: Eliyehowah
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:31:13 +0000
Innocent huh?
So would you suggest Nazi archeological teams sent to investigate
Aztec remains, while Aztec descendents can be sent to Germany to investigate
supposed Jewish graves?
How is then that you run to save or protect members of every
current christian religion, claiming they'll kill or commit suicide
if their End of the world date dont happen ! What makes you NOT
think that when the Aztec end didnt happen, that they too didnt
go to human sacrifice to claim they were preventing THAT end !
And that when the Catholics came killing with guns, it was seen
as salvation from their own priests' delusions.
Anything like a hemophiliac contracting AIDS, gets a divorce,
and now lives at gay bars? POINT? I have found people form and
mold their beliefs in ways to comfortably fit in someone's gathered group
of self-empathisers. Is that what makes these Aztec defenders !
The lets-all-sit-in-the-same-boat, or bird's of a feather,
or whatever lies people can make REAL so as to feel better.
Because of this, you can't believe ANYTHING anymore and people
thus care LESS and merely go selfishly each one's way. There is
no unity in these groups whether white-supremists, anti-this and anti-that,
or let's defend the ancient Aztecs, ancient Egyptians etc.
How does life even give people time to come up with this stuff!
My own work is a GOAL and takes effort which costs me time,
effort, work, money, all costing my job.
************
A voice crying out and going unheard,
http://www.execpc.com/~elijah/myPhoto.gif
(40 years Oct 7) Nehemiah's (9:1) 50th JUBILEE of Tishri 24
elijah@wi.net
elijah@execpc.com
asteroid@execpc.com
Discover the world's true chronology thru the Bible at
http://www.execpc.com/~elijah
God's 1000 years has begun Sep 14 of 1996.
http://www.execpc.com/~elijah/Ezra1991CE.gif
Subject: Re: A State of Denial, or finding it hard to accept the facts: was Re: Linguistic diffusion: was Re: Egyptian Tree Words
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:14:51
In article <32591671.3AD0@PioneerPlanet.infi.net> Saida writes:
>
>As you may have noticed, I am not much impressed by "universal
>linguistic opinion", if there really is such a thing, or I would never
>have offered the observation that I see a good deal in ancient Egyptian
>that looks like IE. Because of this, I am very suspicious of any
>classification of this language. Not only that, but I am most wary of
>some of what is nowadays "universal linguistic opinion" of the
>pronunciation or value of the hieroglyphs. Additionally, as I am well
>out of the academic or controlled study of Egyptian, I have no reason to
>worry about its classification among the world languages. In other
>words, I have no one to tell me what I must believe in order to pass
>tests or get a degree. To me, it is just "Egyptian", the study of which
>has become a fascinating and enlightening hobby. The more I learn, the
>more it surprises me.
I am sorry, but this is a completely irresponsable answer. "Universal
opinion" is not based on fairy tales or empty intuition. It is the result of
a tremendous amount of hard work by many people over generations. If you want
to deny it, you have first know it, and then have cogent reasons for rejecting
it and proposing something different. Otherwise, it is all whistling in the
dark, and, quite frankly, a waste of everyone's time, including your own.
Subject: Re: Sumerian etymology of the word Lugal
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:20:53
In article <53b8t7$1jv@halley.pi.net> mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) writes:
>
>whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet) wrote:
>[nitpicking mode for the benefit of those who want to look for
>references:]
>>>>Best and Wouznian
>See under: Best and Woudhuizen
>>>> that the Phaistoes Disk
>See under: Phaistos (Phaestus) Disk
>>In 1894 clay tablets were found at Bogazkov
>See under: Bog^azko"y (Boghazko"y)
>>The dating is by reference to the Armana letters.
>See under: Amarna letters, a.k.a. Arzawa letters.
>>University of Vienna professor Bedrich Hrony
>See under: Hrozny', Bedr^ich
Right. I am curious, since I know little about Hrozny's life, if he really
was a professor at the University of Vienna (this is not a trick question).
Hrozny was Czech, and I thought that he taught at Charles University in
Prague. I could be wrong, however. Just as an aside, after he made a name
for himself by figuring out Hittite, he bacame obsessed with it and tried to
read every known unread script as Hittite, including the Cretan and Indus
Valley texts. It was all rather sad. He wrote a history book that was based
on such things which I once had and it was really quite crazy. We prefer to
remember him for his excellent early work in Assyriology and Hittitology.