Subject: Re: Egyptians were and are...
From: Saida
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 18:23:27 -0500
The Hab wrote:
>
> Saida wrote:
> >S. F. Thomas wrote:
> >>
> >> Katherine M. Griffis wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "S. F. Thomas" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >It was the same with me. That is the essential *forest* to
> >> > >which I always return when the eurocentrists try to confound
> >> > >me with endless disputation about individual *trees*. Sure,
> >> > >there were some caucasoids among the ancient Egyptian pharaohs,
> >> > >but it was clear to me, being there, and visiting the tombs,
> >> > >that by a large preponderance, they were Black people.
>
> Wrong. They were predominently non-black (I assume "black" is non-Saharan
> African).
>
> >You must have had your dark glasses on the whole time. I am really sick
> >of repeating this: Yes, there were black pharaohs--must have been at
> >the time of the Nubian Conquest. Other than this assumption, there is
> >not one single shred of evidence pointing to the kings of Egypt having
> >been black as opposed to Caucasion.
>
> Define Caucasian...they were North African in geographical ethnicity.
Look it up in the dictionary. What word would you use to call a person
who is neither negroid nor oriental? Geography is not very helpful in
defining ethnicity unless all the people living in an area are of like
background.
>
> >Certainly, the men of Egypt were
> >painted with a reddish-brown skin, but that was an artistic canon.
>
> Really? ever seen a modern Egyptian fellah in the sun for a few hours?
> They certainly do turn a reddish-brown! It was more than just an artistic
> canon.
I know what you are saying here. Yes, the sun is a big factor. I have
an olive-skinned daughter who got very dark this summer from all the
swimming, but she is already fading to being her natural pale ivory.
>
> >Where a group of men were standing in a row, every other one was painted
> >yellow so the composition wouldn't look like a dark blob. Should we
> >deduce from that that fifty per cent of ancient Egyptian men were
> >dark-skinned and the other half light?
>
> Yellow/beige was and is more to the actual colour of the Egyptians. In
> the sun, many turn a reddish-brown.
Yes, I am glad you pointed out the environmental factor. Yet I think
you will agree that there are a number of Egyptians who are naturally
darker due to living in Upper Egypt and having perhaps a Nubian ancestry
than those whose families have resided in the Delta for a long time.
>
> >On your tomb-hopping excursions, did you perchance ever venture into the
> >tombs of Queen Nefertari or Prince Montuhirkhopeshef? These are among
> >the most beautifully painted sepulchers of Egypt. Nefertari's skin
> >isn't even yellow in her tomb--it is rosy pink and the prince's skin is
> >painted a cafe au lait. Their features look nothing like the way
> >Egyptian artists usually depicted negroid persons. Yes, the Egyptians
> >were very careful to show themselves as looking different from other
> >races--although, of course, this was not always the case in reality.
>
> Although the average Egyptian's skin color was and is a yellowish-beige
> colour, some have lighter skin and some darker. Just like all human
> populations.
>
> >How about an even more reliable kind of evidence than art? Ever check
> >out the royal mummies? These ARE the kings and queens of Egypt you
> >refer to--not a negroid type among them. Although is now impossible to
> >see the original skin color of the person, their features and hair are
> >still admirably preserved. Where there is hair, it is of the fine
> >Caucasian quality, straight, sometimes wavy, but not crisp or woolly.
>
> Try not to use the "Caucasian" terminology...unless you define what that
> is. I would say that they are North African features (not here that it is
> a geographical and not "racial" term).
I am not really so sure what you mean here.
>
> >Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is the truth. Even the lightest-
> >skinned "black" people I have seen rarely have Caucasian hair.
> >
> >You've got to accept it--Egypt was a melting-pot. At the time of the
> >18th and 19th Dynasties from whence the royal mummies, a large per cent
> >of the population had become of Asiatic background, probably the royal
> >family ,itself, to a great extent. Even in the Old Kingdom,however,the
> >sculptures of the pharaohs give no indication that these people could be
> >termed "black" as opposed to just plain Egyptian.
>
> Egypt NEVER changed to an "Asiatic background". in 7 000 years, the
> population remained North African.
I never meant it to be taken that the entire populace of ancient Egypt
had become Asiatic. I do think, however, that the population did shift
ethnically from time to time. Remember, the Hyksos ruled the Delta for
an extended period and, although they were supposed to have been
expelled by King Ahmose, there was nothing to be done about those
foreigners who had long ago assimilated into the population. The same
goes for the Israelites and others. After the Nubian conquest, when
would have to assume the Nubian component increased appreciably as the
southern frontier opened up, there were the Persians and others to the
west. By and by, there were a great many Greeks( at least in the Delta)
and, lastly, the Arab takeover.
>
> Although I agree with the jist of your post, I would advise that you be
> more carefull in terminology.
Well, it is difficult to find correct terms, politically, ethnically,
etc. One wants to be fair, but I'm not sure lumping people
geographically does the trick. It is an interesting albeit touchy
subject. I just invested a wad in a gorgeous book called "The
Mysterious Fayum Portraits" by Euphrosyne Doxiades. The author is
evidently a Greek and an artist and she points out which portraits look
to her Greek, Egyptian, Jewish, etc., but, on the whole, the wonderful
paintings look to me like types one could find in any Sicilian village
and don't much resemble anybody I associate with dynastic Egypt from the
old portraiture or even the mummies I have studied to such a great
extent.
>
> The Hab
Saida
Subject: Re: Egyptians were and are...
From: 1@2.3 (Hussein Essawy)
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 19:51:01 -0400
In article <326962EF.738F@PioneerPlanet.infi.net>, Saida wrote:
[...]
: Well, it is difficult to find correct terms, politically, ethnically,
: etc. One wants to be fair, but I'm not sure lumping people
: geographically does the trick. It is an interesting albeit touchy
: subject. I just invested a wad in a gorgeous book called "The
: Mysterious Fayum Portraits" by Euphrosyne Doxiades. The author is
: evidently a Greek and an artist and she points out which portraits look
: to her Greek, Egyptian, Jewish, etc., but, on the whole, the wonderful
: paintings look to me like types one could find in any Sicilian village
: and don't much resemble anybody I associate with dynastic Egypt from the
: old portraiture or even the mummies I have studied to such a great
: extent.
When I was in Cairo this summer, I spent a good 45 minutes infront of the
Fayum Portraits on the second floor of the Egyptian Museum, trying to
judge for myself if any of the two dozen or so portraits on display had any
similarity to the Joe Blow walking on the streets of Cairo. Well I could
find a couple of portraits that fit this criterea, so I rationalized by
saying that the ruling people (greeks/romans) were probably the ONLY ones
that could afford to have these portraits done.
On a sad note, the best portrait, that of the two brothers, seems to be
falling apart!
Have a good day,
Hussein
--
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be proof-read with the help of the
mailer, his postmaster, and if necessary, his upstream provider(s).
Subject: Re: Egyptians were and are...
From: The Hab
Date: 20 Oct 1996 05:24:51 GMT
Saida wrote:
[snip]
>> >> > >that by a large preponderance, they were Black people.
>>
>> Wrong. They were predominently non-black (I assume "black" is non-Saharan
>> African).
>>
>> >You must have had your dark glasses on the whole time. I am really sick
>> >of repeating this: Yes, there were black pharaohs--must have been at
>> >the time of the Nubian Conquest. Other than this assumption, there is
>> >not one single shred of evidence pointing to the kings of Egypt having
>> >been black as opposed to Caucasion.
>>
>> Define Caucasian...they were North African in geographical ethnicity.
>
>Look it up in the dictionary. What word would you use to call a person
>who is neither negroid nor oriental? Geography is not very helpful in
>defining ethnicity unless all the people living in an area are of like
>background.
"Caucasian" is not a very exact term. Studies done by population
geneticists tend to group by geography (to a large extent)...words like
"Caucasian" are not used very often. North Africa (as a region) is
considered different from West Asia and Europe as well as the Indian
sub-continent even though peoples in these regions are lumped in the
"Caucasian" category. And yes, North Africans are believed to have
originated in the central Saharan regions (and some parts of northern
Sudan), so "of like background" does come into play.
>> >Certainly, the men of Egypt were
>> >painted with a reddish-brown skin, but that was an artistic canon.
>>
>> Really? ever seen a modern Egyptian fellah in the sun for a few hours?
>> They certainly do turn a reddish-brown! It was more than just an artistic
>> canon.
>
>I know what you are saying here. Yes, the sun is a big factor. I have
>an olive-skinned daughter who got very dark this summer from all the
>swimming, but she is already fading to being her natural pale ivory.
When you work all day in the sun, like the fellahin, you tend to stay
red-brown for a long time and the colour tends to be associated with men
who are the ones working in the outdoors. Conversely, women were
associated with the natural yellow/beige colour because they were
indoors.
>> >Where a group of men were standing in a row, every other one was painted
>> >yellow so the composition wouldn't look like a dark blob. Should we
>> >deduce from that that fifty per cent of ancient Egyptian men were
>> >dark-skinned and the other half light?
>>
>> Yellow/beige was and is more to the actual colour of the Egyptians. In
>> the sun, many turn a reddish-brown.
>
>Yes, I am glad you pointed out the environmental factor. Yet I think
>you will agree that there are a number of Egyptians who are naturally
>darker due to living in Upper Egypt and having perhaps a Nubian ancestry
>than those whose families have resided in the Delta for a long time.
Of course, the Upper Egyptians even have a different blood group ratio
than the Lower Egyptians even though the two groups are the closest to
each other. (i.e., an Upper Egyptian is closer to a Lower Egyptian than
he is to a Nubian, etc...).
[snip]
>> Although the average Egyptian's skin color was and is a yellowish-beige
>> colour, some have lighter skin and some darker. Just like all human
>> populations.
>>
>> >How about an even more reliable kind of evidence than art? Ever check
>> >out the royal mummies? These ARE the kings and queens of Egypt you
>> >refer to--not a negroid type among them. Although is now impossible to
>> >see the original skin color of the person, their features and hair are
>> >still admirably preserved. Where there is hair, it is of the fine
>> >Caucasian quality, straight, sometimes wavy, but not crisp or woolly.
>>
>> Try not to use the "Caucasian" terminology...unless you define what that
>> is. I would say that they are North African features (not here that it is
>> a geographical and not "racial" term).
>
>I am not really so sure what you mean here.
See above.
>> >Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is the truth. Even the lightest-
>> >skinned "black" people I have seen rarely have Caucasian hair.
>> >
>> >You've got to accept it--Egypt was a melting-pot. At the time of the
>> >18th and 19th Dynasties from whence the royal mummies, a large per cent
>> >of the population had become of Asiatic background, probably the royal
>> >family ,itself, to a great extent. Even in the Old Kingdom,however,the
>> >sculptures of the pharaohs give no indication that these people could be
>> >termed "black" as opposed to just plain Egyptian.
>>
>> Egypt NEVER changed to an "Asiatic background". in 7 000 years, the
>> population remained North African.
>
>I never meant it to be taken that the entire populace of ancient Egypt
>had become Asiatic. I do think, however, that the population did shift
>ethnically from time to time.
"Shift" means that the genetic markers somehow were different. Not true.
There has never been a "shift".
>Remember, the Hyksos ruled the Delta for
>an extended period and, although they were supposed to have been
>expelled by King Ahmose, there was nothing to be done about those
>foreigners who had long ago assimilated into the population. The same
>goes for the Israelites and others. After the Nubian conquest, when
>would have to assume the Nubian component increased appreciably as the
>southern frontier opened up, there were the Persians and others to the
>west. By and by, there were a great many Greeks( at least in the Delta)
>and, lastly, the Arab takeover.
All these groups, although adding to the gene pool, were insignificant
genetically. They were like a drop in the ocean.
>> Although I agree with the jist of your post, I would advise that you be
>> more carefull in terminology.
>
>Well, it is difficult to find correct terms, politically, ethnically,
>etc. One wants to be fair, but I'm not sure lumping people
>geographically does the trick. It is an interesting albeit touchy
>subject. I just invested a wad in a gorgeous book called "The
>Mysterious Fayum Portraits" by Euphrosyne Doxiades. The author is
>evidently a Greek and an artist and she points out which portraits look
>to her Greek, Egyptian, Jewish, etc., but, on the whole, the wonderful
>paintings look to me like types one could find in any Sicilian village
>and don't much resemble anybody I associate with dynastic Egypt from the
>old portraiture or even the mummies I have studied to such a great
>extent.
Maybe it is because the paintings in the ancient times were of a differnt
style? One Japanese friend even told me the ancients looked oriental.;)
The Hab
Subject: Re: Silver
From: mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:21:51 GMT
Piotr Michalowski wrote:
>In article <5477gi$j46@halley.pi.net> mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal)
>writes:
>>>I have found, also in my notes to Gamkrelidze and Ivanov, an Akkadian
>>>word for "iron", (Aramaic ), which is doubtlessly
>>>related to the Hebrew word. I don't know the origin, but it looks
>>>suspiciously Sumerian to me, a compound based on the Sumerian word BAR
>>>(or BAR-BAR > BABBAR) "white, silver, metal", as in ZA.BAR "bronze"
>>>(stone-silver?), AN.BAR "iron" (sky-silver), A.BAR "lead"
>>>(water-silver?).
>>>If so, BAR.ZILU, or ZILU.BAR actually, could be an excellent candidate
>>>for being the etymon of English "silver". But I don't know what to
>>>make of this Akkadian "-zillu". Sumerain means "to peel off",
>>> is "pleasing, nice". Maybe we should rather look at a word
>>>like , a weight (Sin-iddinam 6 II 16-24: "When I dug the
is actually a (liquid/volume) measure [c. 1 liter, according
to P. Michalowski, "Letters from Early Mesopotamia", p. 7], not a
weight.
>>>Tigris, the big river, as wages each man received [??] barley, 2 sila
>>>bread, 4 sila beer, and 2 shekel oil, daily he received like this").
>>>But I don't know if this weight was ever used for silver or iron.
[Haven't seen this. John Halloran, I presume?:]
>>I already have in my lexicon as the Sumerian reading for the signs
>>AN.BAR 'iron', from plus 'to pare, cut'. Aside from obsidian
>>glass, iron makes the sharpest knives of any metal.
>Miguel: I have no idea about the "origin" of the word, but the root is
>definitely widely distributed in Semitic languages, including Ugaritic,
>Hebrew, Aramaic, Epigraphic South Arabic (przn) and Arabic (firzil). This
>makes it quite unlikely that it is a loan from Sumerian, and it certainly
>would have nothing to do with the sila bowl and sila measure.
True, a "litre of silver [or iron]" does sound a bit strange.
> The Sumerian
>was an-bar, often in early texts an-bar su3-ga. The reading barzil is
>probably a late learned back reading. If such a reading does exist--and I
>would have to look into it further--most probably it would be a loan from
>Semitic. Meteoric iron has very little role in Mesopotamia before the first
>millennium [...] Since all indications are that iron came to be important long
>after Sumerian was a dead language,
True. The twist that I added in my speculations (and they are no more
than that), was to see a Sumerian *[sil..?]-bar as the etymon of
certain European (Basque, Germanic, Balto-Slavic) words for _silver_
(later, and in the shape of *bar-zilu, applied to _iron_ in the Near
East). I'm just not very happy with the traditional Akk. Sarpu
etymology for "silver", and was trying some alternatives. If we
assume a Sumerian loanword in Akkadian, my explanation is as unlikely
as the traditional one (How did the word get to the Baltic and the Bay
of Biscay? Why no trace of it in some geographically intermediate
language? etc.), but I think it makes a better phonetical fit, at
least with Basque (*silar) and Germanic (*silabr-), and maybe even
with the Hittite/Iranian/Balto-Slavic tin/lead words (*[s]olwi-/
*[s]olwo-) [but I'm not holding my breath].
Now the questions are: Can a Sumerian *{s|z}il[V]-bar "some kind of
metal" be hypothesized? (Or do we have it already in
"bronze"?) Is it credible that the order of the two elements was
reversed (I'm thinking of an.nag / nagga, "tin")? In Sumerian? In
Semitic? What, if any, might be the connection with Akkadian Sarpu
"silver" [cf. Akk. 'alum "city" < Sem. *'iri-]? How and when did the
word spread westwards?
>and the distribution of the root in Semitic
>languages is such that it makes a Sumerian loan unlikely, as it would have had
>to pass from Akkadian into all of these languages and there are precious few
>examples of a Sumerian loan going into such wide circulation, I would sincerely
>doubt it.
True. But the words for metals would seem to be an exception to the
rule. The Indo-European languages at least have borrowed words for
the different kinds of metals from some really exotic sources...
>Hittite hapalki [is] completely unrelated.
True.
==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
mcv@pi.net |_____________|||
========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
Subject: Re: AFRICAN monuments...those Everlasting PYRAMIDS
From: pmanansala@csus.edu (Paul Kekai Manansala)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 96 01:53:39 GMT
In article <3269149F.2F51@utoronto.ca>,
Troy Sagrillo wrote:
>Paul Kekai Manansala wrote:
>>
>> In article <3267CF1E.A65@utoronto.ca>,
>> Troy Sagrillo wrote:
>> >Paul Kekai Manansala wrote:
>> >[snip]
>> >> The problem here is that Egypt is in Africa, right next to Nubia. Blacks
>> >> have always been a part of Egypt. The evidence itself, as presented by
>> >> Arkell, Williams, Grzymski, Keita and others points to the Egyptian
>> >> dynasties having their origin in Qustul of Ta-Seti.
>> >
>> >Williams' conclusions have been generally rejected for lack of any
>> >credible evidence.
>>
>> His views may be rejected by some, but certainly not all. If you are saying
>> he is rejected by the majority Eurocentric establishment, what's the big
>> deal? However, for those who would desire to consider his views check the
>> webpage of the Oriental Institute's Nubia exhibit at:
>
>Please understand, it is *not* because of his conclusions that his
>findings have been generally rejected, but because of *the lack of
>credible evidence* on which he has based them. The whole question of the
>Nubian origin of pharaonic culture hangs on his incense burner from
>Cemetery L. The problem with it is that all of the "pharaonic"
>iconography is conveniently located in the **reconstructed* part of the
>artist's drawing -- in other words, it does not exists. It may have, but
>there is no evidence that it does for sure. Most reviewers of the Qustul
>vol. have noted that the burner is likely an Egyptian import anyhow.
>Lastly, *older* pharaonic iconography has been discovered in Egypt since
>the publication of the Qustul material, so the whole question is moot
>now anyhow.
>
>> http://www-oi.uchicago.edu/OI/PROJ/NUB/NUBX/NUBX_brochure.html
>
The age of the A-culture at Qustul has also been dated back to 3,800 BC.
Your explanation of the Qustul theory is oversimplified. Here is what Williams'
states in the webpage stated above:
"Most surprising, evidence that early pharaohs ruled in A-Group Nubia
was discovered by the Oriental Institute at Qustul, almost at the modern
Sudanese border. A cemetery of large tombs contained evidence of wealth
and representations of the rulers and their victories. Other representations
and monuments could then be identified, and in the process, a lost kingdom,
called Ta-Seti or Land of the Bow, was discovered. In fact, the cemetery at
Qustul leads directly to the first great royal monuments of Egypt in a
progression. Qustul in Nubia could well have been the seat of Egypt's founding
dynasty."
Williams (1987) gives six reasons why he believes that the Steu of Qustul
founded Kemetic civilization (from C.A. Winters (1994) Valid frame of reference,
_Journal of Black Studies_, December 1994.)
1. direct progession of royal complex designs from
Qustul to Hierakonpolis to Abydos;
2. Egyptian objects in Naqada III a-b tombs;
3. no royal tombs in Lower and Upper Egypt;
4. pharonic monuments that refer to conflict
in Upper Egypt;
5. inscriptions of the ruler Pe-Hor that are older than
Iry-Hor of Abydos; and
6. the 10 rulers of Qustul, 1 at Hierakonpolis, and
3 at Abydos corrspond to the "historical" kings of
the late Naqada period.
S.O.Y. Keita noted how A-culture tombs appear in Upper Egypt just
before the beginning of the dynastic period. Discussing his dendograms
of various 1st dynasty cranium with series from other regions he states:
"The strong Sundanese affinity noted in unknown analyses may
reflect the Nubian interactions with upper Egypt in predynastic
times prior to Egyptian unification (Williams, 1980, 1986).
Ta-Seti, the A-Group state based in Qustul (Fig. 1), perhaps
the earliest known kingdom in the Nile Valley (Williams, 1986)
apparently conquered portions of upper Egypt. A-Group type
royal tombs have been found in Upper Egypt (Williams, 1986).
(Keita, S.O.Y., "Further Studies of Crania from Ancient Northern
Africa: An Analysis of Crania from First Dyansty Egyptian Tombs,
Using Multiple Discriminant Functions" _American Journal of
Physical Anthropology_ 87:245-254, 1992)
Keita states in the same work:
"The predominant craniometric pattern in the Abydos royal tombs <1st
Dynasty> is "southern" (tropical African variant), and this is consistent
with what would be expected based on the literature and other results.
(Keita, 1990)
All this evidence agrees with the inscriptions recorded at a temple of Edfu.
Here is a post I made on this subject in another forum:
---------------
According to E. A. Wallis Budge, _A short history of the
Egyptian people_, 1914, pp. 22-27, an inscription from
Ptolemaic times at Edfu mentions an invasion of Egypt
from the South during predynastic times. The text
mentions king Ra-Harmakhis of Ta-seti who invaded with an
army of Mesniu, or "Blacksmiths." Budge believes these
blacksmiths worked copper that was found in early sites
in the South.
Interestingly, in the Sahel region of Africa pro-blacksmith
and anti-blacksmith societies still exist. The inscription
states that the Mesniu were lead by the god Horus,
while those in Southern Egypt were led by Set.
Finally, Horus gained victory by driving a spear
through Set's neck and beheading him:
"The text goes on to say that companies of
"Blacksmiths," settled down on lands given
them by Horus on the right and left of the
Nile and in what is now called "Middle Egypt,"
thus the followers of Horus from the South
occupied the country."
This Edfu texts supports archaeological finds at Qustul
which show a movement of the A-culture into Upper Egypt.
This movement seems to have eventually led to the
unification of Upper and Lower Egypt and the founding
of the first dynasty. Budge goes on to say:
"The success of Horus continued to press more and
more northward, and to occupy the more northern parts
of the Nile Valley...As a result, however, of one
of the battles between the South and the North,
which was probably near Anu (later, Heliopolis), the
king of the South gained the victory, and he was
henceforth able to call himself "King of the South,
King of the North."
Again, this agrees entirely with the archaeological record.
----------------
The inscriptions state that the Mesniu were makers of harpoons and
metal spearheads, which brings to mind the Aquatic culture of the
Sahel region in the Late Stone Age. Although they were not (yet)
blacksmiths, they specialized in making harpoons and similar artifacts.
Also, the blacksmith cultures whose origin is lost in the distant past
are concentrated in the same region formerly occupied by the Aquatic
culture.
Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala
Subject: Re: Silver
From: Troy Sagrillo
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:58:41 GMT
Saida wrote:
>
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
> > That gives me /p3-r3-j-s3-l/: "parisal" or "paritchel" or something
> > like that?
> >
> > The "syllabic" style of writing and the "lion" suggest a borrowing.
> > The source is likely to be either Hebrew (Phoenician) or
> > Akkadian .
>
> It sometimes bothers me when I see Semitic "loan words" into Egyptian
> because I wonder how it can be ascertained that the loaning was not vice
> versa.
IMHO, we can know for 3 reasons:
1. the word is written in a special "syllabic" orthography that the
Egyptians used for (mostly) foreign words -- not just Semitic languages,
but others as well.
2. the word occurs in a *lot* of Semitic languages (if it is in North
(Classical) Arabic, South Arabic (Sabaic), Hebrew, Ugaritic, Akkadian,
etc. as Piotr says, then it can pretty much be assumed to be Semitic (or
at least not Egytian))
3. as you say, iron is introduced *into* Egypt from Southwest Asia
What I want to know is the Egyptian text that this word occurs in. The
orthography suggests a Late Egyptian context, but Budge doesn't give his
source.
> In this case, however, it looks like everybody and his brother
> in western Asia had iron before the Egyptians, because the earliest
> evidence of iron smelting was excavated by Flinders Petrie, going back
> to the 6th Century B.C., whereas the Asiatics had it by the third
> millenium B.C. However, iron artifacts, presumably gifts, were found in
> royal tombs such as that of Tutankhamun (1336-1327) B.C. The Amarna
> letters mentions gifts of iron sent to Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, who
> preceded Tut, indicating the prestigious nature of the metal at this
> time. My info is from "The dictionary of Ancient Egypt".
>
> I have a great interest in ancient Egyptian pronunciation. As I said in
> an earlier post, Budge gave the "duckling" or "sitting duck", as you
> aptly call it, as "th" and "tch". If it is now supposed to be "s3", I
> am not aware of it. Maybe Troy will tell us.
here goes! The sign in this word is the duckling chick [Gardiner G47],
which in syllabic orthography ("group writting") is phonetic /T/ (tj).
The /s3/ duck is sign G39 (and not in this word).
> The "mouth" is just still
> "r", as far as I know, and the "lion" does represent "l" but is also
> used for "r" at times.
The /rw/ lion (and the normal mouth /r/) is used for Semitic /l/ and /r/
in syllabic orthography
> I believe (and this is just my impression) that
> this interchangeability occurred because the Egyptians pronounced these
> two sounds alike (even though "l" was foreign to them). It is my idea
> that both "r" and "l" came out rather like "w", as in the Polish "l"
> with the slash through it. We already know that the Egyptian "r" tended
> to be "weak" because it did not seems to be omitted by foreigners in
> their transliterations of Egyptian names and even the Egyptians omitted
> it themselves at times. I feel sure that the British habit of rendering
> "r's" negligible at the end of words applied in Egyptian as well.
I agree with this, especially in Late Egyptian. What I think is
intersting is that in some dialects of Coptic "r" is written for
hieroglyphic /r/, but in others it might be "l" or a vowel. IMHO, the
presence of "l" in in some Coptic dialects strongly suggests that /l/
was in pharaonic Egyptian as well. This is indicated in *Egyptian* words
where the scribe as used the special syllabic orthography normally used
with foreign words and wrote /n+r/: we know from Semitic loan words (and
Coptic) that /n+r/ was pronounced /l/. For example, "outside" /r bnr/ is
"ebol" in Coptic. (The initial /r/ has softened as Saida suggests to a
vocalic glide).
Troy
Subject: Re: Silver
From: piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:46:34
In article <54cg92$p8l@halley.pi.net> mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) writes:
>
>True. The twist that I added in my speculations (and they are no more
>than that), was to see a Sumerian *[sil..?]-bar as the etymon of
>certain European (Basque, Germanic, Balto-Slavic) words for _silver_
>(later, and in the shape of *bar-zilu, applied to _iron_ in the Near
>East). I'm just not very happy with the traditional Akk. Sarpu
>etymology for "silver", and was trying some alternatives. If we
>assume a Sumerian loanword in Akkadian, my explanation is as unlikely
>as the traditional one (How did the word get to the Baltic and the Bay
>of Biscay? Why no trace of it in some geographically intermediate
>language? etc.), but I think it makes a better phonetical fit, at
>least with Basque (*silar) and Germanic (*silabr-), and maybe even
>with the Hittite/Iranian/Balto-Slavic tin/lead words (*[s]olwi-/
>*[s]olwo-) [but I'm not holding my breath].
The normal Akkadian word for silve was kaspum, which reflects common Semitic
KASP-. The word you mention, sarpum (withemphatic s) is not the normal word,
but is an adjective that means "refined", and can be used of silver as well as
of pottery ("fired"). It has cognates in Syrian and Arabic.
>Now the questions are: Can a Sumerian *{s|z}il[V]-bar "some kind of
>metal" be hypothesized? (Or do we have it already in
>"bronze"?) Is it credible that the order of the two elements was
>reversed (I'm thinking of an.nag / nagga, "tin")? In Sumerian? In
>Semitic? What, if any, might be the connection with Akkadian Sarpu
>"silver" [cf. Akk. 'alum "city" < Sem. *'iri-]? How and when did the
>word spread westwards?
I sincerely doubt any word like *zil-bar in Sumerian. There is absolutely no
evidence for any such form. As for bronze, Akkadian siparru and Sumerian
zabar, are, to my knowledge, unique, and the Akkadian has no cognates in
Semitic langages. Although it is often thought that the Akkadian comes from
the Sumerian, there is also the strong possibility that they both originated
in a third language. The issue of tin is more complicated, as are the
documented changes in reference of metal words. Early lexicographers did not
know much about metal technology nor about the kind of metals that were
archaeologically attested so they tended to make one-to-one corresonces with
modern classificatory usage. The Ebla materials, from the third milennium,
for example, provide new evindence for metal terminology and the work of Muhly
and others has goven us much new information on technology, sources and the
kinds of metals in use.
>>and the distribution of the root in Semitic
>>languages is such that it makes a Sumerian loan unlikely, as it would have had
>>to pass from Akkadian into all of these languages and there are precious few
>>examples of a Sumerian loan going into such wide circulation, I would sincerely
>>doubt it.
>True. But the words for metals would seem to be an exception to the
>rule. The Indo-European languages at least have borrowed words for
>the different kinds of metals from some really exotic sources...
I would agree with you very much. Some of the words for metals in
Mesopotamian languages seem like loans, and at this point I would, upon
reflection, consider the word for iron to be one of them as the Semitic root
przl or the like, with four consonants, seems like a loan. I seem to remember
a recent discussion of it, but the old memory is not what it once was! There
was an article some time ago by Juri Vartanov, "Proischozdzenie semitskih
nazvanii metalov" (pardon my transliteration) --the origin of Semitic words
for metals (in Russian), Drevnii Vostok 4 (1983) (from Erevan) in which he
suggested that the word for iron was a loan from Hurrian *b/parzilli, but that
is a stretch, since no such word is known. It is a nice idea, however, as
much earlier on the Sumerian word for a metal smith, tibira, is thought by
many to be already a loan from Hurrian.
Subject: Re: Father=Creator=Pater=Ptah=Pitar=Stupidity
From: Saida
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:37:05 -0500
Weeeeell, as much as I hate to open this can of worms again, I think, in
all fairness to Steve, I should bring up something I saw yesterday while
reading "Ancient Egyptian Literature", Vol. III, by Miriam Lichtheim
p.94. This may or may not have some bearing on a past discussion by
Steve and Troy, which I copy here:
In article <3259EA14.27D5@utoronto.ca>, t.sagrillo@utoronto.ca says...
>
>Steve Whittet wrote:
> >> >>I was thinking of "Ptah r" where "r" is more of a verb
"Ptah r", where "r" is the verb "iri" (make, do, create)
I wrote the verb "iri" as "r" following Gardiner who says
the verb "iri" is *usually* written "r"
>> >> >
>> >> >Actually, Mr. Whittet shows his ignorance of the structure of the
>> >> >Egyptian language, whose preferred syntax was verb-subject-object.
>> >
>> >And by claming that /r/ is a verb to begin with....
>>
>> Gardiner page 214 Section 281 Tetiae Infirmae verbs
>> "(iri) make; do; is usually written without the expected phonetic
>> complent (r)"
>>
>> So...is Gardiners Egyptian Grammar incorrect...?
>
>No, of course not, and this has absolutely *nothing* to do with anything
>other than orthography (writing). Gardiner is referring to the /r/ of
>/iri/ *not* being **written** as a distinct grapheme but implied in the
>biliteral /ir/ sign (the eye).
No. Gardiner is specifically talking about the verb "iri"
get a copy and read it.
But you are changing the issue once
>again. you wrote:
>
>"The Egyptians believed that things were created by giving them
>a name "r". Thus the act of creation or naming by Ptah was
>written as "Ptah" "r"."
>
>You did not write "Ptah iri"; you wrote "Ptah r"
Which is the way "iri" is supposed to be written,
and which given its context you should have assumed.
and then continued:
>
>"I was thinking of "Ptah r" where "r" is more of a verb"
>
>Now which is it? "Ptah r" [Ptah + /r/ mouth]
Gardiner writes "iri" as "r"; actually using the mouth hieroglyphic
>(which is impossible as /r/ is NOT a verb),
except in the special case of the verb "iri" to make or do,
read the reference.
or (now) "Ptah iri" [Ptah + /iri/ eye]?? And again I
>ask, where is this text?
I have now cited it twice, this makes three times, I now
have it by memory. Budge BD p 438 rubric 7
>
>Troy
Lichtheim:
"The Theban god Khons was worshipped under several distinct
manifestations, Khons-in-Thebes-Neferhotep occupying the leading
position, while the most outstanding trait of Khons-p3-ir-shr was that
of a healer. The epithet p3 ir shr has been translated in various ways,
including "he who determines fate". Bearing in mind that we do not know
the exact shade of meaning, I have preferred "the Provider"."
Khons, of course, is not Ptah. But here, it seems to me, that "ir" is
associated with doing (or making) something, or, as Lichtheim has
settled on, "the doer of providing". I don't see a title for Ptah that
corresponds to this in my source except for "Ptah-ur" or "Ptah the
Great". IMHO, though, this only reflects on the greatness of the god
and has nothing to do with fatherhood. We have other titles for Ptah as
well with him "south of his wall" and "under his olive tree"--even
"Ptah-neb-ankh" or "lord of life" but really nothing like "Ptah-pa-ir"
that was so much a household word that it took the place of "iti" and
could possibly be the basis of the IE forms of "father". Even if
"Ptah-ur" became an exclamation like "By Jove!" the role of Ptah as the
"father" or "creator" of anything would only be remotely implied and the
spread of language doesn't work by assumptions.
s
Subject: Re: Great Pyramid Dimensions
From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Date: 20 Oct 1996 15:28:57 GMT
In article <548k9g$bou@news.sas.ab.ca>, woodph@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
says...
>
>I've been mildly interested in this topic ever since I read the article
>in "Antiquity" some fifty years ago on the GP and what O.G.S. Crawford
>called "pyramidiocy". I still have difficulty in connecting up an
>Egyptian building dating back to around 2500 BCE, presumably using the
>then-current system/units of length, with the 1925 AD English system/units
>of length.
A very reasonable comment. It puts you in some very good company.
The study of the Great Pyramid goes back at least as far as Herodotus
and the Caliph Al Mamun who may have been among the first to enter
it after its door was closed.
One of the first to note the apparent relation in unitis of measure
was Leonardo Da Vinci who was studying the proportions of ancient
monuments, buildings and statues.
Sir Issac Newton also commented on the apparent closeness of the
units. His involvement was what led Smythe and Petrie to make such
careful measurements.
The French Savants who came to Egypt with Napoleon also wondered about
the close relation to English Units and the newly invented Metric
System which they found in their measurements.
After more than two millenia of study there is a lot of data to consider.
> If you assume that the perimeter of the GP is 36524 inches
>(using a standard inch established in the late 19th century), and then
>argue that this number is 100 times the length of a year (_which_ year?),
>doesn't this require foreknowledge by the builders of the English units
>4500 years in the future?
No. What it argues is that the builders of the pyramid were among
the first people to be interested in establishing accurate standards
of measurement.Their rulers are among the earliest such instruments
ever found. The system they created was useful to other cultures and
they borrowed it for their own use.
As one culture followed another each adopted the oldest and best
established standards of measure they could find. Think what the
merchants whose finances supported the governments would have
said had a change in standards of measure resulted in their
having to provide more grain to their customers and recieve
less money in return. Generally wiser heads prevailed.
The Egyptians themselves had borrowed a good deal from Mesopotamia.
The Greeks borrowed from the Egyptians and established Alexandria.
The Phoenicians borrowed from Egypt and used their measures in trade.
The Standards of measure went into the Aegean, the Red Sea,
The Black Sea, up the Rivers like the Danube, Dneiper and Dneister
The Sea People used them throughout the islands of the Meditteranean
They were in use on Sardinea, Sicily, Crete and Cyprus
The Egyptian standards of measure reached the Euphrates with Tuthmosis
The Kassites, Mitanni, Hittites, Hurrians used them
The Semites used them and they show up in Biblical references.
The Nubians,Kushites, Ethiopians, Hamites and Libyans used them
They spread through Africa and Asia.
The Romans borrowed from the Greeks
The Europeans borrowed from the Greeks and Romans.
The Arabs borrowed from Alexandria.
Alexander brought Greek systems deep into India and Parthia.
We borrowed from the Egyptians in a long series of steps
A Roman foot of 296 mm was the basis of the English foot
The modern English foot is about 304.8 mm
The Egyptian foot of 300 mm was the original standard.
It was divided into 16 fingers
The Roman foot was divided into 16 onzes
Four Egyptian fingers made one palm
The Egyptians added a thumb of of 1 1/3 fingers to make a hand
twelve such thumbs equaled one foot of four palms.
I have already posted the system. It is commensurate with both
the foot and meter.
>And why should a distance number be linked
>meaningfully to a time number?
The Earth revolves around its sun and its moon revolves around it.
The Earth rotates on its axis once in 24 hours. The view of the sun
and the moon and the stars as they rise and fall is thus related to
this rate of rotation and an individuals position on the earth.
Marking the apparent position with a Mekhert and Bay allows such
observations as that they repeat their positions in a cyclical pattern.
The knowledge of such cycles gave astronomers and priests the
ability to predict a whole series of future events and to tie
them into things like floods and the seasons in which crops
would grow and animals would give birth to their young.
The power that came from such observations obviously made
an investment in better methods of measuring and judging
such phenomena useful.
It probably then became apparent that the passage of both
the suns light and shadow marked time.
It marked time by covering a distance on the ground. The higher
the object casting the shadow, and the flatter the ground, the
more accurate the observation would be. The Great Pyamid serves
this function rather well and is indeed surrounded by a pavement
divided into increments which can be used to accurately mark the
passage of the suns shadow.
This is one link between units of time and distance.
The amount of time it takes the sun to rise to its zenith and
indeed whether or not it does rise to its zenith provides some
indication of a persons latitude.
This is one of the most basic premises of navigation.
Pythias used it to give the latitudes of every port and river
mouth on the Atlantic, North Sea and Baltic coasts of Europe
in the 2nd century BC.
That is another link between units of time and distance.
The most fundamental link is the knowledge that a degree
of the Earths equatorial circumference is divided into
minutes and seconds just as a day is divided into hours
minutes and seconds. Since the Sun revolves around the
earth once each day, its shadow moves across the earth
at a rate which relates time to distance.
Given the fact that a geographical degree has the same
number of feet as the number of days in a millenium.
Given that the sun rotates above the earth at a rate
of 24902.72727 miles in 24 hours.
Given that an observer on a high place above a low flat
desert can easily see 70 miles from Horizon to horizon.
The sun crosses 1037.61 miles of the Earths equatorial
circumference in an hour
It takes about four minutes for the suns light to cross
70 miles of desert from horizon to horizon
It crosses 17.29 miles of the Earths equatorial
circumference in a minute. This is 91310 feet.
The Egyptians measure both the time and the distance
for the observation. They place a marker on the horizon
for the start and finish of the observation and they
adjust the markers until the suns light crosses the
distance in exactly the expected period of time and
then they measure the distance.
As a result they get a good ballpark number for
the earths circumference. With some measure of the
earths circumference which can be refined with repeated
measurements, made more accurate by measuring smaller
increments, measuring from inside a well and at a solstice
etc; the Egyptians refine the value down to increments of
a stadia which is 1/600 degree.
This is 608.73 feet. It is 1/150 of the distance the suns
light crosses in a minute. It suggests the Egyptians could
observe the passage of the sun's light with a refinement
of about +/- 1/5 second.
If the Egyptian foot was 300 mm then the ratio of their
feet to our feet was 300/304.8 mm or 599.14/608.73 feet.
The Greeks claimed the stadium was 600 feet.
The Egyptians had divided time into hours, minutes and seconds
following the Babylonian sexigesimal system.
They measured the passage of the sun (which they worshipped)
They observed the sun rises in the East and sets in the West.
They observed the angle of its shadow rotates at a fixed rate
which can mark the passage of time.
They arrived at a unit of the foot from observation of the time
it took the light of the sun to travel across the desert at dawn.
...snip...
>P. H. Wood
>
>"It is very difficult to prophesy, especially about the future" (source
>unknown)
steve
Subject: Re: Silver
From: mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 15:51:05 GMT
piotrm@umich.edu (Piotr Michalowski) wrote:
>Some of the words for metals in
>Mesopotamian languages seem like loans, and at this point I would, upon
>reflection, consider the word for iron to be one of them as the Semitic root
>przl or the like, with four consonants, seems like a loan. I seem to remember
>a recent discussion of it, but the old memory is not what it once was! There
>was an article some time ago by Juri Vartanov, "Proischozdzenie semitskih
>nazvanii metalov" (pardon my transliteration)
It's quite alright, just the tiniest hint of dziekanie...
>--the origin of Semitic words
>for metals (in Russian), Drevnii Vostok 4 (1983) (from Erevan) in which he
>suggested that the word for iron was a loan from Hurrian *b/parzilli, but that
>is a stretch, since no such word is known. It is a nice idea, however, as
>much earlier on the Sumerian word for a metal smith, tibira, is thought by
>many to be already a loan from Hurrian.
The subject is indeed worthy of a monograph or doctoral dissertation.
I can only give a hint of the issues involved in tracing the IE metal
words. The following mostly from Carl Darling Buck "A dictionary of
selected synonyms in the principal Indo-European langauges", and my
notes on Gamkrelidze and Ivanov "Indoevropejskij jazyk i
indoevropejcy".
For GOLD, we have:
1) IE *ghel- "yellow" in Skt. hir-an.ya, Avestan zar-anya, OPers.
dar-anya; Goth. gul-th, E. gol-d; Latv. zel-ts, Slav. zlato (*zol-to).
2) IE *au(H)s- "dawn, east, reddish?", which gives Lat. aurum (*ausom)
(borrowed into Celtic and Albanian); OPruss. ausis, OLith. ausas,
Lith. auksas; Toch. A wa"s, Toch. B yasa; Armenian oski. The Toch.
word might have been borrowed into the Finnic languages (Fin. vaski
"copper"). The root connection with *au(H)s- is not very convincing,
so more adventurous speculations would be comparing with Sum. gushkin,
or Hurr.-Urart. us^hu "silver".
3) Greek has khrusos, a Semitic borrowing (Akk. hura:shu, Hebr.
Haru:tz).
SILVER:
1) IE *Harg- "bright": Grk. arguros, Lat. argentum, Gaul. arganto-,
Skt. rajata-, Av. @r@zata-, Arm. arcat', Hitt. harki- [?].
The word might have been borrowed (from Scythian-Iranian?) into
several N. Caucasian lgs. (arc, warac), Kartvelian *werc'-xl-,
Hurrian-Urartian us^hu [?, see above GOLD]
2) Germ. *sil(a)br-, OPruss. sirablan, Lith. sidabras, Latv. sidrabs,
Slav *surebro. Cf. Basque zilar, Hausa azurfa, Akk. Sarpu- "refined"
or siparru- "bronze", Sum. zabar "bronze" [?]
3) The Hittite spelling KUG.BABBAR-ti = Hat-ti might indicate a
borrowing from Egyptian /HD/ "white, silver"
COPPER:
1) IE *Haies- "copper, ore": Lat. aes (*aies-no-), Goth aiz, E. ore,
Skt. ayas- "iron", Av. ayah- "iron".
2) Greek khalkos, see IRON.
3) General European "copper", etc. < Late Latin aes Cuprium "Cyprus
copper".
4) OIrish umae, We. efydd, from "raw ore", OI. om, We. of "raw".
5) IE *reudh- "red": Skt. loha; OHG aruzzi, Germ. Ertz "ore".
Has been compared to Sum. urudu (Akk. eru^ [?]) "copper" [?].
6) Lith. varis, Latv. vars^, OPruss. wargien. A Finnish loanword has
been suggested (no source given, hardly Finn. vaski "copper", see
above GOLD.)
7) Slav. *me:di-. Source unknown.
8) Hitt. kuwanna, Grk. kuanos "grey, copper, steel". Gamkrelidze and
Ivanov compare Sum. kug-an "sky-metal", but I don't think it exists
(an.bar = "iron", kug is short for "silver", KUG.GI or KUG.SIG is a
writing for gushkin "gold").
BRONZE:
Often not distinguished from "copper".
1) General European "bronze" < Late Lat. aes Brundisium "copper from
Brindisi".
2) Hitt. harasu < Semitic [see GOLD]
TIN:
1) Greek kassiteros, origin unknown.
2) Lat. stannum, stagnum; OIr. sta:n, We. ystaen. Compare Germanic
stone (*stain-) [?], Sum. za.bar "bronze" (za = "stone") [?]
3) OIr. cre:d, origin unknown.
4) Germanic tin, origin unknown.
5) German blech < *bli:k- "to shine"
6) Lith. alvas, etc. See LEAD
7) Russ. zhest' < zhestokij "hard"
8) Skt. trapu-, origin unknown. Sounds interesting.
9) Hitt. dankuli- < dankui- "dark", Dutch "donker" [?]
LEAD:
1) Greek molubdos (molibos, bolimos), origin unknown.
2) Latin plumbum, origin unknown.
3) ONorse bly:, OHG bli:o, German blei, cf. Lith. blyvas "violet
colored" [?]
4) OIr. luaide. Germanic "lead" from Celtic. According to Buck from
*pleu- "to float" [?]
(1) to (4) seem to share a root *bl-i:/u: or *pl-i:/u: [?]
5) Hitt. suliia-, cf. Lat. lividus "blue-grey, lead-colored"
(*s(o)li:-) [?]
6) OPruss. alwis, Slav. olovo, Lith. alvas "tin", Russ. olovo "tin".
Origin unknown.
7) Avestan srva-, NPers. surb, origin unknown.
8) Skt. si:sa-, origin unknown.
(5) to (8) seem to share a root *si:-, sli:-, *solw-, *olw- [??]
9) Lith. s^vinas, Latv. svins, Russ. svinec (*k^vi:-), origin unknown.
IRON:
1) OIrish iarn, We. haearn (*i:sarnon-) > Germanic "iron". Cf. Basque
izar "star". The use of meteoric iron would seem to explain the
associations with "sky" (Sum. an.bar, Eg. /bi3 n pt/).
2) Grk. side:ros, source unknown (Buck). Connection with Lat. sidus,
sideris "constellation" (*sweid- "to shine" [?]), and Celtic-Germanic
*i:sarnon?
3) Latin ferrum, Greek birre: [meaning?]. Maybe from Semitic (Akk.
parzillu, Hebr. barzel, etc.) [?]
4) Lith. gelez^is, Latv. dzels, OPr. gelso, Slav. z^eleso; Greek
khalkos "copper". Origin unknown, maybe root conn. with *ghel- [see
GOLD].
5) Hitt. hapalki. Origin unknown to me.
==
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal ~ ~
Amsterdam _____________ ~ ~
mcv@pi.net |_____________|||
========================== Ce .sig n'est pas une .cig
Subject: Re: Silver
From: whittet@shore.net (Steve Whittet)
Date: 20 Oct 1996 16:11:32 GMT
In article <32692DA7.769D@utoronto.ca>, t.sagrillo@utoronto.ca says...
>
>Saida wrote:
>
>> Here are the metals known to the Egyptians. I also give the
>> Hebrew equivs. As usual, there is more than one word for all of
>> them in Egyptian. I found nothing for "tin" in this language.
I think that you should take some of the discussion of
metals in alchemical and natural philosophical sources
into account here. Metals were considered elements.They
are often refered to as stones.
Their properties were considered more important in determining
which element they belonged to than their actual chemical
composition. Gems and glass are not always distinguished
from metals
Color:
white is associated with bright and can refer to most metals
but in particular gold, silver, tin, zinc, or mercury.
Tin is often refered to as white copper.
yellow is associated with gold, copper, bronze and sulfur
green is associate with copper and bronze or emeralds
blue is associated with copper and cobalt and lapis
red is associated with iron or carnelian,
Ductability:
Gold, silver, copper, mercury, references to and association
of bendable bars with snakes
Hardness
Bronze, Iron
>
>For the sake of completeness, I wanted to give the modern MdC
>translitertions (and for Miguel's sake as well).
>
>http://131.211.68.206/names/rules.html
>
>n.b., Harris = Harris, John Richard. 1961. Lexicographical Studies in
>Ancient Egyptian Minerals. Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu
>Berlin Institut fu"r Orientforschung 54. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag GmbH.
>
>> EGYPTIAN HEBREW
>>
>> Gold-- nub (main word) zahav
> /nbw/
>
>> sau
> /s3wy/ (only in Ptolemaic texts)
>
>> qetem (does the Ger. "Kette" or neck- ketem
>> lace, chain have anything in common?)
> /qdm/; /qtm/ "unknown substance"
the measure of a qedet might be the association here.
>
>> white-gold --nub hetch
> /nbw HD/ = silver (most English-speaking scholars only use
>/HD/; Germans generally pref. /nbw HD/; however, Harris cites 2
>instances where /nbw HD/ is contrasted with /HD/ in a text)
>
>> green-gold--nub wadj
> /nbw wD/ (fresh gold??; gold with high copper admixure??)
emerald set in gold
>
>> finest gold--nub en qen
> /nbw n qniw/ ("gold of yellow colour")
>
>>
>> Silver hetch kesef
> /HD/ (see above also)
>
>> arq ur (pure silver) (Gr. arguros)
> /`rqwr/ (Greek loan word in Egyptian)
>
>> nub hetch (white gold)
> (see above)
>
>> ich (a white metal, possibly silver)
White metal could be any metal, but since silver and gold
are refered to otherwise, Tin is a good candidate.
> /iH/ (???? I found the word in Budge without citation, but
>not in anything more credible. Not in the Worterbuch or Harris as far as
>I am aware)
>
>
>> Copper hemt nehoshet
> /Hmt/ (also read as /bi3/)
Measured amounts of Copper came in ingots
"hmt" = woman, queen
"hmt" = Majesty, royal, high ranked
"hmt" = (?) copper, fig for firmness of charecter
from "hmwy" an amount of work
"hmty" = coppersmith
"hmt" = skill
"hmw" = be skilled, skillfull
"hmww" = craftsman. expert
"hmwt" = craftsman
>> hemt kam (black copper)
> /Hmt km/ (copper just smelted from ore)
My quess is this is more likely silver which appears black in its ore.
Copper appears green in its ore, I have never seen it look black.
>
>> hemt Sett (Asiatic copper)
> /Hmt sTt/ (naturally occuring bronze?)
>
>> ba'a (?)
> /bi3/ (alternate translit. of /Hmt/ based on Coptic -- much
>in Harris regarding this issue)
>
>
>> Bronze ut arad
> (misreading by Budge for /wH3t/ "cauldron")
>
>> a'aha (weapons of bronze)
> /`H3w m Hmt/ ((weapons of copper; /`H3/ "weapons")
>
>> smen
> /smn/ (means "jewelry" or "amulet")
>
>> Lead techt-t oferet
> /DHty/
>
>> nus (block or pig of lead)
> /nws/ "ingot"
>
>
>> Tin b'dil
>>
>> Iron banpi barzal
> /b3npy/ = late semi-phonetic writing for /bi3 n pt/ "copper
>of the sky" (Coptic benipe)
>
>> parthal (iron weapons)
> /prTr/ Semitic loan word (written in special syllabic
>orthography used mainly for loan words)
The earliest iron began to come into Egypt in the 4th millenium BC
probably from across the Red Sea where large platelets of sulfated
iron are deposited by airborn sedimentation from the gases vented
by the oil domes of Arabia.
steve
Subject: Re: Aircraft Flight Paths & Pyramids?
From: rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R. Gaenssmantel)
Date: 20 Oct 1996 17:26:17 GMT
andrew.elms@datacraft.com.au wrote:
: I was hoping someone could verify something for me.
: I was recently at a crackpot seminar given by some guy who reckons the
: pyramids are actually huge "physic anntenna" for talking to beings in
: other galaxies, and that what the archiologists call ventilation
: ducts, actually line up with other planets and can be used as
: directional antenna.
From the physics point of view you can safely bin all this. The only way to
transmit anything through virtually empty space would be by using a carrier
that can actually travel a vacuum. The only possibility are electromagnetic
waves (be they light, radiowaves,...). For light signalling you would probably
not need a a duct, just some strong optics - actually event the strongest
optics we can produce today would most likely not live up to that (and I assume
neither would lasers).
For any electromagnetic waves with lower frequencies (longer wavelengths) you
need antennae/arials. These have to be made of conducting materials, since the
electrons' oszillating in the conductor causes the waves you want to transmit.
Stone is insulating.
If the pyramids were made of metal the whole theory would still be crap, since
their shape is about the most stupid one could come up with for radio
transmission. A (large) flat piece of metal would be a better antenna, since
the intensity of the transmitted signal would (in reasonably close vicinity)
only drop with 1/distance. A pyramid is not quite as bad as a point shaped
antenna with a drop of 1/(distance squared), but it is pretty bad.
If you go far enough away even a plane becomes comparable to a point shaped
transmitter (probably as soon as you go further away than 1 or 2 plane
diametres). So for any interstellar transmission you'd get a drop of 1/(r^2).
This drop in signal intensity would make any communication impossible. The
star closest to the solar system is about 3 light years away. With light
travelling 300 000 km/second you can calculate how many km this is and what
percentage of your signal would arrive. Then you can calculate how mauch energy
you'd have to put in to make communications possible. I can't be bothered to go
through that now, but I guess it would be more energy than we produce every
single day.
The only geometry suitable for long distnce radio communacation is a parabolic
antenna, since it can prevent the beam from diverging too badly (but even this
has its limits).
Other problems for long distance communications: the signal received is very
weak and needs amplifying (how would that be done?), the signals need to be of
a very high frequency (in the giga Hertz range) because of the drop in
intensity (how would that be achieved?).
Ralf
: Whilst i personally think that this is all a load
: of bullshit he did mention that aircraft are not allowed to fly over
: the top of the pyramids.
If they weren't allowed to fly over I assume it would be for similar reasons as
planes are not allowed to fly over nuclear power plants, the white house....
A plane crash would have desasterous consequences (in this case for world
heritage rather than health), but if you've got enough uninhabited desert
around you might as well fly there.
: He says that it is because of the HUGE
: mangetic fields generated by the pyramids (yeah, sure), but i was
: wondering if this is true what reasons if any are given for why they
: wont let aircraft fly over them?
Thats crap. If those magnetic field were so huge that they could be dangerous
they would also be large enough to affect the compasses af any ship in the
world - let alone the mediterranean. The magnetic field would have to be
several orders of magnitude larger than the magnetic field of the earth, so our
compasses would be pointing at Giza and not north!
The pyramids are not of magnetic material so they can't have a permanent
magnetic field.
One doesn't transmit anything by magnetic fields. One uses electro-magnetic
fields. Any change in one will induce a change in the other - you cannot
produce just electric or just magnetic fields in the higher frequency range
(meaning frequencies higher than the 50Hz/60Hz mains hum). Therefore you would
have to used electric means to excite a magnetic field for signal transmission
- read you've got to put energy into it, it has to be conducting, and for long
distance communication (more than a hundred meters) you need a suitable
geometry.
So bin the whole thing. Whoever told you that is out to catch fools with
popular catch phrases - and the aura of mystery surrounding the pyramids.
Ralf
: Elmo
--