>>Are you saying that these are not the names the kings are born with<<

Yes, the cartouche texts are NOT names of the kings. This is not a hasty or random statement. It is a whole theory based on nearly 25 years of profound studies and research work. But to inspect it in some detail you have to check it first by yourself. Therefore, we should have you and me, one common good reference to start a fruitful discussion. One very popular reference for the cartouches is:

Chapter II of Wallis Budge Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary, pages 917-946, titled "List Of Egyptian Kings".

So if you have this volume then we can start the discussion, otherwise we have to wait until you purchase it.

King No.11: the cartouche has only one sign, the 'scorpion' [L7].

Please, I want you to write down the phonetic value of the scorpion Hieroglyph in light of the traditional Egyptology according to Gardiner. Then I want you to write down the name of this king and what it means.

King No.421, second cartouche, including the following Hieroglyphs:

[N29-G1-M17-M17-S29-S7-G1-M17-M17-S29-D21:O34-S7:E23-U31-E24:Z4-N29-M17-M17-S34-I10:X1:N16]

I want you to write down the phonetic values of this 'name' according to Gardiner phones in a pure serial way. Then I want you to write the final 'name' as one word and what it means.

Thank you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alsaadawi-4:
Very good. Now let's start inspecting two cartouches, one from the predynastic era and the second from the Roman era.

King No.11: the cartouche has only one sign, the 'scorpion' [L7].

Please, I want you to write down the phonetic value of the scorpion Hieroglyph in light of the traditional Egyptology according to Gardiner. Then I want you to write down the name of this king and what it means.

King No.421, second cartouche, including the following Hieroglyphs:

[N29-G1-M17-M17-S29-S7-G1-M17-M17-S29-D21:O34-S7:E23-U31-E24:Z4-N29-M17-M17-S34-I10:X1:N16]

I want you to write down the phonetic values of this 'name' according to Gardiner phones in a pure serial way. Then I want you to write the final 'name' as one word and what it means.

Thank you.

---

I'm not sure if this is exactly what you want, but I'm going to give it a shot. For the 1st king I have "Tchar" (?). I guess Budge is not completely sure because he put the question mark. This name means the "Scorpion".

Next I have "Heq hequ Autkrtr meri Ptah Ast Kais Kaisrs Germ[a]nikis". As one word it looks like this "HeqhequAutkrtrmeriPtahAstKaisKaisrsGerm[a]nikis".

This means "everliving, beloved of Ptah and Isis", but the person is said to be Caius Ceasar Germanicus Caligula.

Dr. Alsadaawi, I did not find the same 'scorpion' sign in Gardiner's list as in the cartouche on pg 917 in Budge's list of kings. The symbol Budge gives and Gardiner's [L7] are clearly different. Is their a reason why this symbol is not included in Gardiner's list?

Searching through Budge's dictionary I found the 'scorpion' symbol on pg cxxi section XI #11 however I did not find a phonetic value strictly for this symbol other than the name/word/phrase 'Tchar(?)' in the List of Predynastic Kings, which Budge seems to be unsure of. There are various words for 'scorpion' that include this sign as what appears to be a either a literal pictograph or a phonetic compliment.

Examples:

Literal pictograph (?)
pg 170a 'hur'
pg 819a 'tai'
pg 839b 'tenta'

Phonetic Compliment (?)
pg 176a 'uha-t' (t)
pg 516b 'het-t' (t)
pg 522a 'hett' (t)
pg 522b 'hetchtch' (tch)
pg 899a 'tchar-t' (tch)

What is the correct phonetic value for this symbol?

I also do not have the Gardiner text (only the sign list). Does Gardiner use different phonetic values than budge for this name. Using Budges phones this name is slightly different than what he himslef actually uses for the transliteration of this cartouche.

Example:
According to Budge's phonetic values the second cartouche would read 'qais kaisrs krmnikis ankh djet' slightly different than the transliteration that he gives of the cartouche 'Kais Kaisrs Germ[a]nikis'. In either case it is clear that the name of 'Caius Caesar Germanicus (everliving)' is spelled out phonetically, but he himself did not follow his own phonetic values. For instance, although the k and q sounds are similar, he uses 'k' for [N29]. Also the 6th sign (Budge H.D. pg cxxxiv, section XVII, #3) he uses first as 'K' and then as a 'G' for the 13th sign (by the way the S7 from Gardiner's list that you refered to is not the same sign).

When writing the phonetic values in a serial manner according to Budge you get :

'qaiskaisrskrmnikis (ankh djet)'

But what does this mean as one word??

------------------
Nesu.t-bi.t neb-taui Neb-Maa't-Re sa-Re Amen-hotep

[This message has been edited by Neb-Ma'at-Re (edited 05 January 2004).]

For many years Egyptologists considered that the scorpion sign [L7] is just an ideogram that has no real lingual phonetic value. They told us many imaginary and superstitious false stories about the AE scorpion and they asked us to believe what they wrote because they are great scholars and definitely know what we don't know! For example, here is what written in the Dictionary of Ancient Egypt by the British Museum:

>>The scorpion ideogram, one of the earliest known hieroglyphic signs, was depicted on the wooden and ivory labels found in the late predynastic / early dynastic temple at Hierakonpolis. A predynastic ruler called 'Scorpion' was portrayed on the 'scorpion macehead' from Hierakonpolis.

The goddess Serket was the principal divine personification of the scorpion (although Isis was also said to have been protected from her enemies by seven scorpions), and was usually depicted with a scorpion perched on her head. Another, less well-known deity, the god Shed (also described as 'the savior'), was linked with the scorpion and considered to afford protection against its sting; two stelae dedicated to Shed were found in a chapel associated with the workmen's village at El-Amarna<<

Then suddenly the Egyptologists changed their minds and decided that the AE 'scorpion' sign [L7] is a real lingual element and could be used in writing some far predynastic texts. For example they say:

>>Of Early Writing and a King of Legend

April 16, 2002

By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD

Carved in the limestone of a desert cliff in Egypt is a 5,250-year-old tableau of a victorious ruler, perhaps the so-called King Scorpion - whose exploits, previously the stuff of myth and legend, may have been critical to the
founding of Egyptian civilization. The archaeologists who discovered the tableau seven years ago now say it may be the world's earliest historical document.

More than that, they say, the inscribed scenes and symbols bear a strong resemblance to later hieroglyphs. This is a significant addition to a growing body of evidence that the first true writing originated in Egypt - not in ancient
Sumer, in what is now Iraq, as scholars of antiquity had believed.

While some aspects of the discovery are controversial - particularly the suggestion that the ruler depicted is King Scorpion - several archaeologists familiar with it agree that this represents an early stage of writing, perhaps
earlier than Sumerian writing.

And since the invention of writing is regarded as the great divide between prehistory and history, the discovery may push back the beginning of recorded Egyptian history 100 to 150 years, to about 3250 B.C., well into the obscure period before the land's unification under powerful pharaohs.
Until now, the earliest recognized historical document in Egypt was the Narmer Palette, found in the late 19th century in the ruins of ancient Hierakonpolis and dated 3100 B.C<<

I don't know according to which "theory" they changed their minds and released this breakthrough lingual historic statement. All what I'm sure of is that they did that after I published my True deciphering of the 'scorpion' sign [L7] allover the world and online! The least scientific honesty implies that they should tell people why they changed their minds and what is their real scientific source or scientific theory they relied on.

Anyhow, the AE 'scorpion' king still carries the 'English' name 'scorpion' which demolishes the whole theory of Champollion about cartouches from the Very Beginning!!

Now, let's go to the End of cartouche 'naming' theory. According to Champollion and traditional theory the name of this king should read as:

"q-a-y(ii)-s-khprsh-a-y-s-rs-khprsh-rw-khnt-nwi-q-y-s-3nkh-Dtta"

But Wallis Budge offered him a slightly different name like this:

"q-a-i-s-k-a-y-s-rs-k-rw-m-nwi-q-y-s-3nkh-Dtta"

Putting the name together according to the traditional theory then the name of this king should read as:

"qaiskaysrskrwmnwiqys3nkhDtta"

Is this a NAME in any Global Language whatever it may be?

But Wallis Budge or may be other Egyptologists say that this is Not One Name but a Series of Names like this:

"qays - kaysrs - krwm - nwi - qys - 3nkh - Dtta"

It means that the name of this king is:

"qays" the son of "kaysrs" the grandson of "krwm" who is the further son of "nwi" and the grandson of "qys" who is EVERLIVING!!

Is there ANY man in history who is EVERLIVING?!!

Now if we inspect the first name only in light of this peculiar and odd theory we find that the first name of this king is:

**qays**

Which is a Pure Arabic Name-!

Of course we all know the wordly famous Arabian love story between the Arabian poet "Qays" or "Qais" and the Arabian lady "Lyla"! It is similar to Romeo and Juliet in western tradition.

The question now is:

**Did the Arabians rule Egypt at that time?!!**

No further comment!

Alsaadawi 4

Wonderfully you nearly reached the same conclusions like I did. You further explained the difference between (q) and (k) in Egyptian language. Of course they are not the same.

All the entry words about the scorpion [L7] you cited are correct. There are also many others. This means simply that the scorpion sign [L7] is NOT an ideogram but surely it is a "phonogram" that has a specified phonetic value.

And according to "Alsaadawi's Theory on True Hieroglyphs" this scorpion sign [L7], and like 'any' other AE Hieroglyph, could be used by its true phonetic value to compose countless of Egyptian words with countless of meanings.

Then you kindly asked:

>>What is the correct phonetic value for this symbol<<

The True phonetic value for the scorpion AE grapheme is:

**[L7] = 3q / q3**

It is equivalent in AE hieroglyphic phonemes to [D36:N29].

In Egyptian etymology there are many entries for reading the true denotations of this sign.

IMO, I think that the scorpion king chose this sign [L7] for certain wisdom. He wanted to tell his Egyptian peoples the following:

**don't be arrogant and proud of your power, just look to the peoples before you and see what the bad fatal-end of the disbelieving oppressors was**!

This meaning is attested by the following entry expressions of the scorpion sign [L7]:

[L7-V16]

"The Worterbuch, Vol.4 p.204"

[O29-L7], [M86:L7], [L7#F10], [F30:L7], [O34 21:N29-L7], etc.

We should notice also that some Egyptologists mixed sometimes between the scorpion sign [L7] and the trussed 'duck' sign [G54] known as 'Snd'!!

This great AE king chose this sign in particular because his birth name was the very popular Egyptian name:

**ya3qwb** = **Jacob**

This famous name is expressed in Hieroglyphs by one AE hieroglyphic sign which is the scorpion sign [L7].

Why?

Because the name of the scorpion in Egyptian is:

**3qb** or **3qrb**.

Alsaadawi 4

>>I don't know where you're getting phonetic values for the symbols. For example, apparently [N29] corresponds to the phonetic value q, but where do I find this type of info? It doesn't appear to be in anywhere in Budge's text<<

You told me that you have already Budge EHD. On page 760a and on the start of the chapter titled [Q] you will find the first entry is given as follows:

q = [N29]

On the other hand if you want to go thru Hieroglyphs you must have:

"Egyptian Grammar, by Sir Alan Gardiner"

At the end of this valuable reference you'll find a sign list arranged in the so called Gardiner Numbers with their traditional phonetic values. It is just a good start.

>>However, take someone like Ramses II. I realize his coronated name is much longer, but is your argment that his birth name was not Ramses, or that none of his names were Ramses?<<

Yes his birth name is NOT 'Ramses'! In Hieroglyphs his name is like follows:

[N5-M17-Y5:N35:N36-F31-S29-S29]

Which reads according to traditional rules as follows:

"ra - imn - mri - ms - s" = "ra-mri-imn-mss"

But they offered him a 'nick' name as 'ramses'!!

The True meaning of this cartouche text is:

**the believing devoted Egyptians**!!

You notice that this 'name' includes the following main Hieroglyphs:

[N5], [Y5], [N36], [F31] and in other cartouche we find also another (mr) Hieroglyph or the hoe [U6].

The [N5] or (r3) is just naming by the God.

The [Y5] or (mn) means believing (men)!

Then we have:

mS / mri = mSri = Egyptian

Therefore, the most probable name MPN for this great king is "maSri" which means "Egyptian".

The name "MaSri" is still very popular name among men in Egypt and there are a lot of "MaSri" families in Egypt. I have also a Lebanese friend living in New York whose name is "MaSri"!

>>I've never seen a meaning for his name<<

Some professional Egyptologists say that his name means:

"the beloved of Amon, who is begotten by Ra"!!

I don't know how a man could be begotten by Ra?!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Dr. Alsaadawi, this is a very interesting exercise, but I don't think I have the right resources to participate just yet. I'm not very good yet at read the glyphs, and I don't know where you're getting phonetic values for the symbols. For example, apparently [N29] corresponds to the phonetic value q, but where do I find this type of info? It doesn't appear to be in anywhere in Budge's text. He has a list of symbols and phonetic values, but nowhere do I see anyhting like [N29] or [G1]. I think I'm going to be confused until I figure this part out.

---

Kem,
Here is a link to Gardiner's hieroglyph list: http://showcase.netins.net/web/ankh/gardiner.html

If you have Budge's Hieroglyph dictionary in volume 1 on the the very second page of this book you will find Budge's transliteration and phonetic values to the "Ancient Egyptian Alphabet". Here you will find the 'q' sign (in which Gardiner assigned as [N29]). Please forgive for I am not at home and do not have my books in front of me, but if you continue to flip through volume 1 in the Roman Numeral pages you will find Budge's extensive sign list in which he gives transliterations (phonetic values) and translations (meanings) for many but certainly not all of these signs. There are many signs that appear on Budge's list and not Gardiner's and vise versa. As you may know, Budge's reputation has somewhat of a blackmark on it for many mis-ransliterations as well as mis-translations and Gardiner seems to be preferred over Budge, but as Dr. Alsadaawi has pointed out to the world this also applies to many of the tranliterations,phonetic values, and translations of any modern decipherment of hieroglyphs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ozzy:
Or here Kem, this one is easy to read. Ii have been watching but I too do not yet understand. Keep going though, itis very interesting.
http://www.arcom.com.au/~vincent/signlist.htm

---

Please not there are three signs missing from this list : E26, F52, and S21

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kem-Au:
Thanks Neb! I see now where you're getting the number letter combinations again. I'll try this execise again tomorrow. The is also a good way to learn the glyphs. Thanks again.

---

You're very welcome.

I just finished reading some very interesting pages on Dr. Alsadaawi's site that explain how he determined that some falsely deciphered heiroglyphs by Champollion and others have different phonetic values. I am really begining to understand where his passion and excitment comes from by discovering such mistakes in what the Egyptological society as well as the rest of the world has taken to be truth.

Here are 5 examples of signs that he has found to have different phonetic values than what has traditionally been believed, (for full detail on the processes in which he used to determine these correct values refer to http://alsaadawi.exeedia.com/notes_display.asp?notes_id=15 ):

1. He found that [V13] is the true sign for 'L' and not [E23].

2. He found that [Q3] relates to the sound 'F' and not 'P'.

3. He found that [I9] (which is listed as J9 on the list that I posted earlier) has the sound of 'Z' and not 'F'.

4. He aslo found [L3] to have the 'Z' sound.

5. He found that the triliteral sign [F35] which is traditionally pronounced as NeFer is actually pronounced as NaZar.

Just think of the hundreds and hundreds of words and meanings in AE text that change because of these 5 examples alone!!!! Imagine if you take 5 letters of the english alphabet and change their phonetic value what that does to the language! Replace the letter 'P' with the letter 'F' for instince. WOW!

------------------
Nesu.t-bi.t neb-taui Neb-Maa't-Re sa-Re Amen-hotep

I have a few questions for you regarding [L7]. Although similar, I see a clear distinction between Gardiner's [L7] and Budge's [cxxi section XI #11]. There are many signs that have subtle differences from one another, yet these subtle differences may constitute a change in meaning as well as a change in phonetic value. Why do you not believe this to be true with Budge's [cxxi section XI #11] and Gardiner's [L7]?

I wrote earlier:
"There are various words for 'scorpion' that include this sign as what appears to be a either a literal pictograph or a phonetic compliment.

Examples:

Literal pictograph (?)
pg 170a 'hur'
pg 819a 'tai'
pg 839b 'tenta'

Phonetic Compliment (?)
pg 176a 'uha-t' (t)
pg 516b 'het-t' (t)
pg 522a 'hett' (t)
pg 522b 'hetchtch' (tch)
pg 899a 'tchar-t' (tch)

What is the correct phonetic value for this symbol? "

To which you replied:
"All the entry words about the scorpion [L7] you cited are correct. There are also many others. This means simply that the scorpion sign [L7] is NOT an ideogram but surely it is a "phonogram" that has a specified phonetic value.

The True phonetic value for the scorpion AE grapheme is:

**[L7] = 3q / q3**

It is equivalent in AE hieroglyphic phonemes to [D36:N29]. "

I'm a bit confused because you said that all the entry words about the scorpion that I cited are correct , yet none have the phonetic value of '3q/q3' that you gave for [L7]. Does this simply mean that Budge's transliterations are wrong and would the phonetic complements of these words actually be '3q/q3' ?

Thank you for all the great work you are doing. Your posts are real reference.

>>I'm a bit confused because you said that all the entry words about the scorpion that I cited are correct , yet none have the phonetic value of '3q/q3' that you gave for [L7]. Does this simply mean that Budge's transliterations are wrong and would the phonetic complements of these words actually be '3q/q3' ?<<

I know what you mean, because I went thru this confusion for long years. But when you have 'many' entries for one sign then you have to search for the correct phonetic value the matches ALL these entries otherwise it will not be correct. This needs a long and extensive research work using many Egyptian sources in addition to the work of modern Egyptologists. I used some sophisticated computer techniques and analogies to reach to the correct values. The proof of each sign lies in tens of papers and need long discussions.

Let's take the scorpion in our case here:

For example we have:

[O34:D21:N29-L7] = srq - scorpion. >> (Budge EHD p.612a)

Then we have:

[L7-V16] = scorpion - sa

Then we have:

[O29-L7] = 3a - scorpion.

Then we have:

[G5-L7] = Hr - scorpion

Then we have:

[M86:L7] = rosette - scorpion.

Then we have:

[G7A-L7] = Hours-on-crescent - scorpion.

etc, etc,

Here we must conclude that the scorpion [L7] is not and ideograph but it 'must' has a specified phonetic value that matches all those entries. From here the research work started. Following many regimes the circle went closer and closer until I got this value '3q'. Reapplying it to all entries once more it matched them all including the un-deciphered pictures and depictions.

For example:

[O34:D21:N29-L7] now reads as 'sarie3 al3iqaab' = 'quick in punishment'.

The word '3iqab', which means 'punishment' matches the Egyptian word for scorpion which is '3qb' or '3qrb'. Also the word '3iqab' matches the entry [O29-L7] which means 'punished' or 'punishment' and so on. The Egyptian word (3qb) or (3qrb) for the scorpion is taken from some AE Astro-Etymologies in which they pictured the Scorpion Sun-Sign in the form of the Hieroglyph [L7] and classified it under the phoneme (3) or [D36].

Regards

I thank you for your explanation of the phonetic value of the scorpion sign however I am still curious to know your opinion on the distinct visible difference between Budge's [section XI #11] and Gardiner's [L7]. I don't see enough of a similarity to consider them the same sign. Gardiner's[L7] tends to remind me of some type of water bug instead of a scorpion, where as Budge's [section XI #11] is unquestionably a scorpion.

My question was:
"Although similar, I see a clear distinction between Gardiner's [L7] and Budge's [cxxi section XI #11]. There are many signs that have subtle differences from one another, yet these subtle differences may constitute a change in meaning as well as a change in phonetic value. Why do you not believe this to be true with Budge's [cxxi section XI #11] and Gardiner's [L7]?"

I have never seen any texts or examples that use Gardiner's [L7],other than Gardiner himself.Can you point me in the right direction to find this?

------------------
Nesu.t-bi.t neb-taui Neb-Maa't-Re sa-Re Amen-hotep

>> I see a clear distinction between Gardiner's [L7] and Budge's [cxxi section XI #11]. Why do you not believe this to be true? <<

Gardiner depiction is only a simplification of Budge scorpion. There are also some other different depictions of the AE scorpion and in the 'British Museum Dictionary' they explained this by saying:

"Two main species of scorpion are found in Egypt: the paler more poisonous Buthridae and the darker, relatively harmless Scorpionidae"

But most important miss-transliteration is the confusion between [L7] sign and the Snd [G54] sign. This confusion is quite clear in the Worterbuch depictions. Here we must be careful when reading the numerous words that include [G54].

In all cases the scorpion depictions should relate to [L7] taking into considerations that the AE's depicted the scorpion having arms in the form of the Hieroglyph [D36] or (3) Egyptian phoneme.

Alsaadawi 4