posted
Many classic historians discredit any truth from Plato/Solon's accounts. Today, are they discredited, and how/why?
In the narratives, Solon eludes to the Egyptians having translated a number of names from another language from a time ancient Egyptians refer to as, Zep teri, or the First Time , a kind of Golden Age that began at the point of the First Creation and was ruled over by the ntr - gods , such as Osiris and his son Horus. this Golden Age was viewed by the Egyptians as a time of "absolute perfection - "before rage or clamour or strife or uproar had come about". No death or disaster occurred in this blissful period , known variously as "the time of Re", "the time of Osiris", or "the time of Horus".
I find the time scale used here confusing. If they are to believed, this places the age of the pyramids at 10-22,000BC. Any thoughts to help me come to terms with this would be appreciated.
Posts: 3595 | From: Moved To Mars. Waiting with shotgun | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Plato/Solon's account are NOT ACCURATE.. They were based on 2nd hand accounts,both never spoke the AE language nor did they understood its script..
Plato/Solon came from aristocratic family that had vested interests in churning out myths in order to control the "general populace" as some would put it
And at that late stage in the AE civilisation even the priests,the majority, could hardly decipher texts of the ancient dynasties and were seldom in agreement with one another as to their original interpretations..
Notice the incremental number of hieroglyphs that from around 700BC till the Roman time- from roughly 800 it their number went up to close to 5,000 or more !
E.A. Budge and others in his time have stated that the AE language did not possess the linguistic tools to fully render the intricacies of the developping Greek/Roman philosophical concepts..
Just take out the greek/latin roots out of the English ,French..languages and you will quickly see what I mean..
I might add that Demotic AE texts that are still being uncovered have remained largely untranslated up till today,,
That very few books in English do exit;one has to learn German in order to access reference books on that subject(and they have not been updated for over 70 yrs !)
In fact modern egyptologists do not care about the AE pronounciation..
But as per my view there is certainly more than meet the eye here if you consider that next to all egyptologists receive their grants from private foundations that are funded by the power broker sof thsi world..
And yes most egyptologists are members of different secret societies,notably the freemasons..
They are annoyed by the New Agers that gravitate around their field so in 2008 they are setting up a website ONLY AVAILABLE(most parts of it) to certified EBYPTOLOGISTS and members of the AKADEMIA that need to know on a per person basis..
Most of their publications/research papers are going to be made available JUST ONLINE azand you will need an ID number to acces them like for the JSTOR DBAse.. thus rectricting de facto the flow of informations..
NOTE- Most other branches of science(chemistry,physics,etc..) are also going that way..
Remember the old dictum "Knowledge is power"...
Posts: 305 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Ray is correct about everything, except perhaps the freemasons part. Which Egyptologists are as you say freemasons? If Hawass is one of them, he's doing a bad job! LOL
As for Egyptologists not caring for the actual pronounciation, it may not be so much a matter of "caring" than the fact that no one really knows what the pronounciations were! Remember, Egyptian like many Afrasian languages had only their consonants written with the vowels left out.
However, as Ausar has stated many times, a good clue as to how ancient Egyptian words were likely pronounced would be in the local dialects of the rural Fellahin. As far as I know, no linguist or any scholar has payed much attention to this so perhaps the 'carelessness' may be true.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
E.A. Budge and others in his time have stated that the AE language did not possess the linguistic tools to fully render the intricacies of the developing Greek/Roman philosophical concepts..
What would those linguistic tools be? Are you saying that a language without Greek or Latin cognates or derivatives cannot express the philosophical ideas of the Greeks? Would that translate to all the languages in the world, when Greek works are translated into non-European languages? The problem with Europeans is that they date philosophy, as they do almost everything else, to the Greeks. They also associate philosophy with questioning religion, when in fact philosophy is an innate human capacity though it may not be named as such. Developing intricate cosmogonies and spiritual beliefs is the product of philosophical speculation that probably dates to the earliest humans who tried to explain the world they lived in. Remember that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Posts: 140 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic