Attached is a very thought provoking - and no doubt a very lenghty - paper by archaeologist Timothy Kendall. I thought I'd share it with the forum. Some of you may be familiar with its content so please excuse me if this is in any way a redundant posting.
A highlight from the paper:
quote:It is Piye's Year 3 Stele that preserves the earliest Napatan record of the kingship tradition of Gebel Barkal. Here he declares that "Amun of Napata granted me to be ruler of every foreign country," and "Amun in Thebes granted me to be ruler of the Black Land (Kmt)" (FHN I 57; Reisner 1931, 89). The twin Amuns of Barkal and Karnak are presented here as mutually supportive aspects of each other, each giving the king a vital portion of his kingship. Only one Amun, however, is shown in the lunette. This is the ram-headed god of Napata, whom the text says gave the king "every foreign country." Yet we see that he is the one handing the king two royal crowns and thus also giving him the kingship of "the Black Land." One crown is the Red Crown of Lower Egypt, and the other is the cap crown, which obviously had some meaning analogous to, but not quite identical with, the White Crown. Here Amun of Napata seems to be granting the gift ascribed to Amun of Thebes. We wonder if there is an inconsistency here, or if we are to understand that the two gods are really exactly the same and perform the same tasks. We also wonder what the king really means here by the terms "foreign countries" and "the Black Land." Does the Red Crown of Lower Egypt symbolize "foreign countries"? Does the cap crown symbolize "Kemet"? "Kemet", in this case, would have to be understood here as a united Nubia and Upper Egypt. By the time of Harsiotef, "Kemet" had come to mean Kush (FHN II 446).
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, archeological evidence shows that both the Red Crown and the White crown originate in the Upper Nile Valley region. I reckon that the reason the Red Crown eventually came to be associated with north regions, is that the Red Crown line of kings progressively [prior to the introduction of the White Crown in the Nagadan strongholds] brought certain territories in that general region under their control to some degree or another before the effective unification of the entire sub-region [both Upper and Lower Egyptian regions] under one centralized polity. The White crown may have been introduced from lower Ta-Seti shortly before said unification. Of course, by Piye's time, the delta areas had long been part of the state of "Kmt"; but yes, it does appear that the Piye considered himself the true ruler of both Kush and Upper Egypt, which would unit those regions in that sense. Therefore, the context in which the delta areas are placed here, is one wherein the state of Kmt was not effectively united, but experiencing a period of rivalry between power players in the delta and Upper Egyptian regions, each with a vested interest in bringing the rest of the country under their control respectively; it thus makes sense for Piye to consider delta areas, prior to bringing them effectively under his control, to be "outsiders". Thus the situation here is all about 'relativity'. I doubt that the local kings of Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt necessarily considered the "other" territory as a 'separate country' from their sphere of influence, notwithstanding the political divisions.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Actually, archeological evidence shows that both the Red Crown and the White crown originate in the Upper Nile Valley region. I reckon that the reason the Red Crown eventually came to be associated with north regions, is that the Red Crown line of kings progressively [prior to the introduction of the White Crown in the Nagadan strongholds] brought certain territories in that general region under their control to some degree or another before the effective unification of the entire sub-region [both Upper and Lower Egyptian regions] under one centralized polity. The White crown may have been introduced from lower Ta-Seti shortly before said unification.
Very interesting I honestly didn't know that the Red Crown also originated in Upper Egypt. I've got some home work to do. Good stuff.
The New Kingdom's belief that Gebel Barkal was the original Karnak, the source of legitimacy of Pharaonic rule, that conferred the right to wear the white crown, has to be considered in the context of the findings at Qustul. If the white crown existed, in Ta-Seti, before the formation of the Egyptian state, then it plausibly existed before Karnak. This scenario would then beg the question: Was there a sacred site in the kingdom of Ta-Seti that, like Karnak, conferred legitimacy on the crown? Also, were the Pharaohs of the New Kingdom merely impressed by the shape of this mountain or was there also a pre-existing tradition amongst them of a southern origin of their rule and therefore a southern Karnak? Consider too the prophecy of Neferti, from the Middle Kingdom, in this regard.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This theory was actually discussed here in this forum on several occasions. I agree there is alot more to Egypt's relationship with so-called 'Nubia' than most Egyptologists are willing to admit.
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This theory and many others are probably not spoken of in some circles. I read this article a while back while searching for something but i will post an important excerpt here.
(Ann Macy Roth) BUILDING BRIDGES TO AFROCENTRISM: A LETTER TO MY EGYPTOLOGICAL COLLEAGUES
quote: The use of actual Egyptian evidence in developing Afrocentric materials could be encouraged and made more authentic if Egyptologists took a less adversarial attitude toward its creators. If we teach Afrocentric students to find evidence for their assertions and to construct convincing arguments, there will always be the possibility that they will use these tools to argue points that we find uncongenial to our pictures of Egyptian civilization. At a conference some years ago, I praised an innovative and provoking argument to a colleague, and his reply was, "Yes, I suppose it was interesting, but just imagine what they will do with it." To use such fears of exaggeration in the popular sphere (regardless of whether they are justified) as an excuse for suppressing arguments that contradict our own reconstruction of the past is unjustifiable and unscholarly. Political bias is unavoidable, so the current wisdom goes, and we all find it more difficult to accept some arguments than others, depending upon our own previous ideas or our feelings about the person making the argument. But such predispositions are something that we all deal with frequently, and should have learned to set aside. We are scholars, and we should not be afraid of the truth, whatever it turns out to be.
I wonder what that "innovative and provoking argument" was? I will see if I can track down her email address and ask her about it.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Building Bridges to Afrocentrism ann.macy.roth@nyu.edu Anyone have suggestions for an email inquiry?
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
Very interesting I honestly didn't know that the Red Crown also originated in Upper Egypt. I've got some home work to do. Good stuff.
As matter of fact, all the earlier pre-dynastic royal Abydos King-personalities artistically appear *exclusively* with the Red Crown first, i.e. before their later pre-dynastic Abydos King counterparts begin to appear with the Red Crown and White Crown respectively in a single artifact, and in some cases, with double "White/Red" Crown.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Building Bridges to Afrocentrism ann.macy.roth@nyu.edu Anyone have suggestions for an email inquiry?
Why bother? Is this not the same Ann Macy Roth who scoffs at the idea that the ancient Egyptians were black despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and tries to group Egyptian culture with the 'Near-East' despite the obvious African affinities?.. the same lady who later got a tongue wagging from the late great Egyptologist Frank Yurco who pretty much called out her racism and Egypt's African identity as well as comparing Egypt's conflict with 'Nubia' no different from Upper Egypt's conflict with Lower Egypt and that it wasn't a matter of 'race' nor necessarily "tribal conflict" as the label so often used for any political and ethnic fighting in Africa!...
Yeah you go head and email her and find out what her simple mind found so "innovating". I bet what that colleague said pales in comparison to just the daily discussions we have in this forum all the time. Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Is this not the same Frank Yurco who was a member of your (Lefkowitz) gang used to attack Afrocentrics and maintain the Eurocentric view of ancient Egypt? [see The Painful Demise of Eurocentrism] It seems youre trying to cover for your friend here Mary. Like your "nonblack Saracens" and your "home grown" Greek classical philosophy it seems you peddle alot of misinformation in here for one supposedly against Eurocentrism. Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know anything about him being part of any gang with Lefkowitz, but only knew that he acknowledged and was a proponent of Egypt's African identity. By the way, all you provided was link to a book cover and not Yurco teaming with Lefkowitz. By the way you should be the last person accusing someone of being in a gang considering the sick gang YOU'RE a part of. Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I don't know anything about him being part of any gang with Lefkowitz...
Well Mary, at least you've grown in wisdom from our exchanges, hence your admission of ignorance re Yurco's writings - least you be exposed again!
Further proof of your maturity is seen by your reluctance to dismiss books you know nothing of as "silly" the way you once foolishly did. You ignorant Catholic philipooo you.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
This item is supposedly dated back to Nagada I, and the area where it was located.
Also,...
This is an ivory piece that was dedicated to king Djer. In that image, only the Red Crown is visible; no sign of the White crown here.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Building Bridges to Afrocentrism ann.macy.roth@nyu.edu Anyone have suggestions for an email inquiry?
Why bother? Is this not the same Ann Macy Roth who scoffs at the idea that the ancient Egyptians were black despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary and tries to group Egyptian culture with the 'Near-East' despite the obvious African affinities?.. the same lady who later got a tongue wagging from the late great Egyptologist Frank Yurco who pretty much called out her racism and Egypt's African identity as well as comparing Egypt's conflict with 'Nubia' no different from Upper Egypt's conflict with Lower Egypt and that it wasn't a matter of 'race' nor necessarily "tribal conflict" as the label so often used for any political and ethnic fighting in Africa!...
Yeah you go head and email her and find out what her simple mind found so "innovating". I bet what that colleague said pales in comparison to just the daily discussions we have in this forum all the time.
Hmm, i didn't know her backgroud.
Posts: 2463 | From: New Jersey USA | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
This item is supposedly dated back to Nagada I, and the area where it was located.
My error; I confused the above item with the one below; not sure about the date of that item above, though it still comes from the Upper Nile Valley:
^Note that ivory tag mentioned earlier, on the right hand side.
Another Predynastic figure sporting what appears to be the Red Crown, also from Upper Egypt [Wadi Qash] and dating back to around the Nagada I phase:
Also, from the Palermo stone piece, we come across several king figures of presumably the predynastic era; some observers guess that they must be from the delta, because of the Red Crown, but I question that premise on the grounds that no predynastic era-oriented material of either authored Kings' list, tags or tombs filled up with regalia symbols as such [i.e. the Red Crown] have been recovered to verify it, as far as I know:
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Very informative post Explorer. To this point I thought that the depiction of the Red Crown on Narmer's macehead was the earliest. The existence of the Red crown in upper Egypt in pre-dynastic times up-ends the accepted view that state formation resulted from White crown Upper Egypt conquering Red crown lower Egypt under Narmer/Menes.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Actually, the fact of the matter has been acknowledged by several observers, including these, as noted in "The Crowns of Kemet" thread on the other board...
In the Wadi Qash, a branch of the Wadi Hammamat, Wilkinson (Genesis, p. 80) cites two rock drawings of men wearing red crowns, which he dates to Naqada I (c. 3600 BC). These drawings place the red crown earliest in Upper Egypt, just where we would expect to find the white crown — only the white crown is nowhere to be seen at this time. From this it appears that the red crown was initially associated with Upper Egypt — or at least the Wadi Hammamat — and that the white crown was a later arrival from somewhere else. - Genesis of the Pharaohs: Genesis of the ‘Ka’ and Crowns?, by Timothy Kendall.
"The red crown, or deshret, may very well have originated in Upper Egypt, although it eventually became associated as the symbol of Lower Egypt. A sherd from a large vessel dated to late Naqada I, near the town of Nubt, the city of Set, has a representation in relief of the red crown, and on both the Narmer palette (one side) and macehead the king’s figure is shown wearing the red crown. - M. Parsons, touregypt.net
the Double Crown, comprising Red Crown (first attested as a motif on a pot sherd from Naqada in southern Upper Egypt, dating to the Naqada Period) and White Crown - the two crowns seem to be designed to form a unit, the White Crown slotting into the Red Crown and being held in place by its distinctive frontal coil; the first monument on which a king is shown wearing both crowns is the siltstone cosmetic palette of king Narmer (depicted on one side of the palette wearing the White Crown, and on the other side wearing the Red Crown); some deities wear one or other of these crowns, but they are not worn by the human subjects of the king - University College London, digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk
The idea that the Red Crown must have always been a "delta Nile Valley thing", comes from narratives setup to explain off scenes displayed on the Narmer Palette. This has often been invoked as events surrounding unification of the two lands; the delta region -- represented by the Red crown, and upper Egypt -- represented by the White crown. However, like Narmer, King Scorpion II -- presumed to have preceded Narmer -- also sported a Red crown in one scene, and a White one in another. Surely, this too could well be interpreted as relating events surrounding unification of the regions. If so, then this would have implied two major unification events, and thus along with it, weaken the 'Narmer as the first unifier' viewpoint. Some of course, have tried to work around the seemingly contradictory indicators, by suggesting that while the initiative and undertaking of bringing the said regions under a centralized polity may have began under rulers who proceeded Narmer, it culminated into Narmer's unification endeavor. To me, this just goes to show the hypothetical nature of the narrative about not only Narmer being the absolute first unifier, but also the notion that the Red crown must have been the regalia of a lower Egyptian polity(s), while the White crown was that of the upper Egyptian rulers. The latter particularly seems to be so romanticized and attractive, that it is virtually repeated everywhere as though it were gospel truth, despite the fact of no predynastic Red crown regalia having ever showed up in lower Egypt, let alone predate the upper Egyptian examples of the same item. However, any idea that the Red crown may very well be ultimately upper Egyptian in origin [as preponderance of evidence as it stands, suggests] would require a relatively more complicated storyline than the aforementioned, which I imagine, lessens its appeal in some circles. I can't think of a single large royal tomb associated with any specific delta king assigned to a specific territory, let alone an elaborate list of kings, tags implicating them or what have you.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally farted by openass: Well Mary, at least you've grown in wisdom from our exchanges, hence your admission of ignorance re Yurco's writings - least you be exposed again!
LOL Don't flatter yourself. I've always had growing wisdom hence my username, but NEVER from any exchange with a sexually disturbed punk kid like YOU! Actually I am familiar with most of Yurco's writings just non any that involves Lefkowitz, since unlike you (despite all your futile accusations otherwise) I'm really not that familiar with her work, just with most Eurocentrics. I only read excerpts here and there about their rebuttal to non-eurocentric scholarship, but I don't obsess over their work the way you do as most of your life is spent obsessing over Jewish works eurocentric or otherwise.
quote:Further proof of your maturity is seen by your reluctance to dismiss books you know nothing of as "silly" the way you once foolishly did. You ignorant Catholic philipooo you.
Mallets and metal bats can break my bones, but your ad-hominem remarks due to intellectual frustration as well as sexual can never harm me. My religious upbringing nor my ethnic background can NEVER change the fact that you are a Euro-loser with a phony-Africanist anti-Jew agenda, and all intelligent posters in here know that. Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: ^Actually, the fact of the matter has been acknowledged by several observers, including these, as noted in "The Crowns of Kemet" thread on the other board...
In the Wadi Qash, a branch of the Wadi Hammamat, Wilkinson (Genesis, p. 80) cites two rock drawings of men wearing red crowns, which he dates to Naqada I (c. 3600 BC). These drawings place the red crown earliest in Upper Egypt, just where we would expect to find the white crown — only the white crown is nowhere to be seen at this time. From this it appears that the red crown was initially associated with Upper Egypt — or at least the Wadi Hammamat — and that the white crown was a later arrival from somewhere else. - Genesis of the Pharaohs: Genesis of the ‘Ka’ and Crowns?, by Timothy Kendall.
"The red crown, or deshret, may very well have originated in Upper Egypt, although it eventually became associated as the symbol of Lower Egypt. A sherd from a large vessel dated to late Naqada I, near the town of Nubt, the city of Set, has a representation in relief of the red crown, and on both the Narmer palette (one side) and macehead the king’s figure is shown wearing the red crown. - M. Parsons, touregypt.net
the Double Crown, comprising Red Crown (first attested as a motif on a pot sherd from Naqada in southern Upper Egypt, dating to the Naqada Period) and White Crown - the two crowns seem to be designed to form a unit, the White Crown slotting into the Red Crown and being held in place by its distinctive frontal coil; the first monument on which a king is shown wearing both crowns is the siltstone cosmetic palette of king Narmer (depicted on one side of the palette wearing the White Crown, and on the other side wearing the Red Crown); some deities wear one or other of these crowns, but they are not worn by the human subjects of the king - University College London, digitalegypt.ucl.ac.uk
The idea that the Red Crown must have always been a "delta Nile Valley thing", comes from narratives setup to explain off scenes displayed on the Narmer Palette. This has often been invoked as events surrounding unification of the two lands; the delta region -- represented by the Red crown, and upper Egypt -- represented by the White crown. However, like Narmer, King Scorpion II -- presumed to have preceded Narmer -- also sported a Red crown in one scene, and a White one in another. Surely, this too could well be interpreted as relating events surrounding unification of the regions. If so, then this would have implied two major unification events, and thus along with it, weaken the 'Narmer as the first unifier' viewpoint. Some of course, have tried to work around the seemingly contradictory indicators, by suggesting that while the initiative and undertaking of bringing the said regions under a centralized polity may have began under rulers who proceeded Narmer, it culminated into Narmer's unification endeavor. To me, this just goes to show the hypothetical nature of the narrative about not only Narmer being the absolute first unifier, but also the notion that the Red crown must have been the regalia of a lower Egyptian polity(s), while the White crown was that of the upper Egyptian rulers. The latter particularly seems to be so romanticized and attractive, that it is virtually repeated everywhere as though it were gospel truth, despite the fact of no predynastic Red crown regalia having ever showed up in lower Egypt, let alone predate the upper Egyptian examples of the same item. However, any idea that the Red crown may very well be ultimately upper Egyptian in origin [as preponderance of evidence as it stands, suggests] would require a relatively more complicated storyline than the aforementioned, which I imagine, lessens its appeal in some circles. I can't think of a single large royal tomb associated with any specific delta king assigned to a specific territory, let alone an elaborate list of kings, tags implicating them or what have you.
Good observation. We discussed this before on this board and the dichotomy of red crown versus white crown as well as horus versus set were seen to be all upper Egyptian elements that eventually got exported throughout the land upon unification. Both the red crown and white crown were upper Egyptian with the white crown possibly being from Ta Seti and the Red Crown from Naqada/Abydos. It is could also be that the red and white crowns had already been developed into their symbolic forms long before unification and therefore upon unification got applied outside upper Egypt. As you mentioned most kings shown wearing the red crown are upper Egyptian kings to begin with.
To me the symbolism of the two crowns has a much deeper history and meaning than simply upper and lower Egypt, but because of the pattern of oversimplifying Egyptian cosmology to fit into nice neat historical sound bites, that meaning and symbolism requires deeper research to uncover.
Posts: 8898 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally farted by openass: Well Mary, at least you've grown in wisdom from our exchanges, hence your admission of ignorance re Yurco's writings - least you be exposed again!
LOL Don't flatter yourself. I've always had growing wisdom hence my username, but NEVER from any exchange with a sexually disturbed punk kid like YOU! Actually I am familiar with most of Yurco's writings just non any that involves Lefkowitz, since unlike you (despite all your futile accusations otherwise) I'm really not that familiar with her work, just with most Eurocentrics. I only read excerpts here and there about their rebuttal to non-eurocentric scholarship, but I don't obsess over their work the way you do as most of your life is spent obsessing over Jewish works eurocentric or otherwise.
quote:Further proof of your maturity is seen by your reluctance to dismiss books you know nothing of as "silly" the way you once foolishly did. You ignorant Catholic philipooo you.
Mallets and metal bats can break my bones, but your ad-hominem remarks due to intellectual frustration as well as sexual can never harm me. My religious upbringing nor my ethnic background can NEVER change the fact that you are a Euro-loser with a phony-Africanist anti-Jew agenda, and all intelligent posters in here know that.
Mary, you're a featherweight.
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Very good observations Doug and Explorer. The time depth and complexity of Ancient Egyptian culture frustrates superficial explanations. As an example, the statue of Mentuhotep above is usually described as an Osiris statue yet he's wearing the red crown!
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:assopen farts: Mary, you're a featherweight.
Again with the "Mary". You love to call me by the name your Jewish mistress, yet YOU are the one who seems to be more familiar with her work than I. And as far as "featherweight", I am actually taken seriously around this forum as a true scholar. You are NOT, but rather taken as a fool which is why everyone else here tries to ignore you. Heck, this is even evident by you stalking me from thread to thread while never addressing the actual thread topic such as now.
Tell us what you know about Gebel Barkal, or Ta-Seti or Nekhen or the proto-hieroglyphs and proto-pharaonic iconography?? Do you know anything outside of what your Jewish mistress and masters tell you??..
For example, that the rock depictions in Qustul depict the same red and white crowns as well as the atef crown with a number of totems such as the hawk and vulture.
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: This theory was actually discussed here in this forum on several occasions. I agree there is alot more to Egypt's relationship with so-called 'Nubia' than most Egyptologists are willing to admit.
Not just a theory. To say: "there is alot more to Egypt's relationship with Nubia" is a vast understatement according to this paper. And the primary documentation is there to back up the claims. Dr. Ben's "we came from the mountain of the moon" statement may be apocryphal but here are the Egyptians themselves saying (for over a thousand years from the New Kingdom down to the time of the Kushitic pharaohs) that their holiest of holies, their Jerusalem, their Mecca, the source of their throne and state, was in the south at Napata and Gebel Barkal. To me this is a big deal and when other things are considered, again, such as the findings at Qustul and the psuedo-prophecy of Neferti (a King shall come from the south the son of a woman from Ta-Seti) it suggests that the shape of Gebel Barkal may have been a big factor in why it was chosen but there must also have been a pre-disposition on the part of Egyptians to view their own provenance as being from the south. I seriously doubt that, if you could have somehow magically transported Geb. Bark. to the Levant, that the Egyptians would have viewed it in the same light.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Of course. And when I said 'theory' I don't mean its popular misused synonym for hypothesis, which is a guess based on observation, but rather its original definition of proposition based on supporting evidence.
What you don't hear too often from egyptological academia is that Egyptian contacts in the south go way back to predynastic times, and even in the early dynastic there are records of sacred sites of the gods, perhaps the paramount being Gebel Barkal.
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anybody got any good pics of what Gebel Barkal may have looked thousands of years ago as well as the sacred images imagines by the ancient Nile Valley peoples?
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Djehuti, not able to find any illustrations of ancient Geb. Bark. but an interesting tidbit, according to Kendall, is that Hatshepsut's Djeser-Djeseru was inspired by Geb. Bark. it was imagined to be the northern manifestation of GB.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of relevance to this topic is this thread here about the Palermo Stone, which makes references to predynastic kings and pilgrimages to sacred sites further south. Some of these sites are described as being the "thrones of the gods". I have no doubt Gebel Barkal was one of these places referred to!
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Of relevance to this topic is this thread here about the Palermo Stone, which makes references to predynastic kings and pilgrimages to sacred sites further south. Some of these sites are described as being the "thrones of the gods". I have no doubt Gebel Barkal was one of these places referred to!
Thanks Djehuti. I've been following that thread also. In fact I don't post very often (not much to say that others can't say better) but I do follow the arguments with great interest and regularly.
back on topic:
In fact in the GB stelae Tuthmosis III says: "...so hear, people of the southern land at the sacred mountain, which was called the Throne of the Two Lands among the people before it was known..."
No doubt here that he is declaring here that GB was called the Throne of Egypt!!!
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And when I said 'theory' I don't mean its popular misused synonym for hypothesis, which is a guess based on observation, but rather its original definition of proposition based on supporting evidence.
Well Djehuti let me school you (in a friendly way of course) on the etymology of the word theory and how it relates to Gebel Barkal.
Bacchus/Dionysus, as we all know, was the god of wine and his worshippers believed that they achieved an ecstatic "union" with god through intoxication induced by drinking wine.
Orpheus was a reformer of the Bacchic cult who may have lived for a time in Crete and may have been influenced by Egyptians. He taught his disciples that if they purified themselves through aceticism and physical exertion the same union with god can be achieved - without alcohol. This union was described as a "passionate sympathetic contemplation of the suffering god" (recall that Dionysus was killed by the Titans who tore his limbs apart). Their term, for this union with the suffering god, was: Theory. The Greek word for god being, of course, theos.
Pythagoras was in turn a reformer of the Orphic cult. He believed that the union with god could best be achieved through intense mathematical thought. This is how the modern meaning of the word was derived. We, by the way, know how extensivley he traveled throughout Egypt.
Diodorus Siculus wrote that Dionysus was the son of none other than Ammon/Amun: The Hidden One of Gebel Barkal.
I threw so many Greek references in there that Americanpatriot/Professor Hore must think he's at a Greek orgy (orgy is also an Orphic term denoting purification)
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I'd be cautious about attributing Greek gods to Egyptians ones. In the example that you point out, it is merely a common custom of the Greeks identifying their own native god with an Egyptian one. In the case of Amun being identified with Zeus. Amun and Zeus are two totally different deities from different cultures with the former being much older. The cult of Amun was later incorporated as Zeus Amun in the Libyan areas of Egypt after Alexander's conquest. But Gebel Barkal's prominence dates back to predynastic times.
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I'd be cautious about attributing Greek gods to Egyptians ones.
Yeh, I can understand where you're coming from Mary as this will not go down well for you "classicists" and your efforts to maintain the purity of Greek classical civilisation.
quote:^ I'd be cautious about attributing Greek gods to Egyptians ones. In the example that you point out, it is merely a common custom of the Greeks identifying their own native god with an Egyptian one. In the case of Amun being identified with Zeus. Amun and Zeus are two totally different deities from different cultures with the former being much older. The cult of Amun was later incorporated as Zeus Amun in the Libyan areas of Egypt after Alexander's conquest. But Gebel Barkal's prominence dates back to predynastic times.
Djehuti, my previous post was meant to be a light hearted, but factual, aside on the word "theory." It was not really intended as comparative theology. I, respectfully, disagree with you, however, regarding the extent of Egyptian influence on classical Greece. I believe that Egypt's influence on Greece was massive and continuous - from the Bronze age through the classical. I believe that this influence included religion and Philosophy. Furthermore, I have high praise for a book such as Stolen Legacy because it was defiant and largely truthful at a time when racism was at its worst. It provided truth, it provided catharsis, it remains iconic in its role of speaking truth to Eurocentric lies. Even if we quibble with some of its content be mindful of the context in which this book was written. It was a brave work by a great man!
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Again, as I continously find myself repeating in this forum (especially to idiotic openasses). I never deny the great impact Egypt had to Greece with its many influences. What I question are certian particular contributions a few here claim to make. Even in religion did Egypt influence Greece, but this is strikingly different from saying the actual deity of Zeus was in fact of Egyptian origin!
Posts: 26299 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Understood. However, I never as much as mentioned Zeus in my post. Nor am I so unschooled as to claim African origin of a word whose etymology is clearly indo-european (Theos, Deus, Zeus, Deus-pater, Jupiter, Tuesday, etc, etc.,). I said that Diordorus Siculus claimed that Dionysus was the son of Ammon. He placed the birth of Dionysus in Libya. This was not merely a replacement of the name of an Olympian god with that of an Egyptian god. This was a separate tradition entirely regarding the origins of Dionysus reported by a contemporary authority on Greek culture.
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're incorrect and cautious without reason and it must be deeply ingrained for you to forget yet again that Herodotus of all Greeks attributes some Greek deities to Egyptian ones, and quite directly in the case of the deities under question.
quote: [Please forgive the length of this post and please do not quote this whole lengthy post when replying to it, just the piece you're commenting on. It'd be a drain of resource to keep repeating the whole thing over and over again. Thanks!]
Was this already presented or is it too simplistic?
Herodotus in his Histories 2.48-64 gives his impression on this topic. Being a Greek it may be bery relevant. Below are a few quotes from him. A good analytic source on Greek mythology showing connections through all the ancient world is Graves' The Greek Myths.
quote: the Greeks, however (those I mean who gave the son of Amphitryon that name), took the name from the Egyptians, and not the Egyptians from the Greeks, is I think clearly proved, among other arguments, by the fact that both the parents of Hercules, Amphitryon as well as Alcmena, were of Egyptian origin.
quote: Melampus, who was a wise man, and had acquired the art of divination, having become acquainted with the worship of Bacchus through knowledge derived from Egypt, introduced it into Greece, with a few slight changes, at the same time that he brought in various other practices. For I can by no means allow that it is by mere coincidence that the Bacchic ceremonies in Greece are so nearly the same as the Egyptian- they would then have been more Greek in their character, and less recent in their origin. Much less can I admit that the Egyptians borrowed these customs, or any other, from the Greeks.
quote: Almost all the names of the gods came into Greece from Egypt. My inquiries prove that they were all derived from a foreign source, and my opinion is that Egypt furnished the greater number. For with the exception of Neptune and the Dioscuri, whom I mentioned above, and Juno, Vesta, Themis, the Graces, and the Nereids, the other gods have been known from time immemorial in Egypt. This I assert on the authority of the Egyptians themselves. The gods, with whose names they profess themselves unacquainted, the Greeks received, I believe, from the Pelasgi, except Neptune. Of him they got their knowledge from the Libyans, by whom he has been always honoured, and who were anciently the only people that had a god of the name.
quote: After a long lapse of time the names of the gods came to Greece from Egypt, and the Pelasgi learnt them, only as yet they knew nothing of Bacchus, of whom they first heard at a much later date. Not long after the arrival of the names they sent to consult the oracle at Dodona about them. This is the most ancient oracle in Greece, and at that time there was no other. To their question, "Whether they should adopt the names that had been imported from the foreigners?" the oracle replied by recommending their use. Thenceforth in their sacrifices the Pelasgi made use of the names of the gods, and from them the names passed afterwards to the Greeks.
quote: Whence the gods severally sprang, whether or no they had all existed from eternity, what forms they bore- these are questions of which the Greeks knew nothing until the other day, so to speak. For Homer and Hesiod were the first to compose Theogonies, and give the gods their epithets, to allot them their several offices and occupations, and describe their forms; and they lived but four hundred years before my time, as I believe.
quote: ...at Dodona, however, the women who deliver the oracles relate the matter as follows: - "Two black doves flew away from Egyptian Thebes, and while one directed its flight to Libya, the other came to them. She alighted on an oak, and sitting there began to speak with a human voice, and told them that on the spot where she was, there should henceforth be an oracle of Jove. They understood the announcement to be from heaven, so they set to work at once and erected the shrine. The dove which flew to Libya bade the Libyans to establish there the oracle of Ammon." This likewise is an oracle of Jupiter. The persons from whom I received these particulars were three priestesses of the Dodonaeans, the eldest Promeneia, the next Timarete, and the youngest Nicandra- what they said was confirmed by the other Dodonaeans who dwell around the temple.
The Dodonaeans called the women doves because they were foreigners, and seemed to them to make a noise like birds. After a while the dove spoke with a human voice, because the woman, whose foreign talk had previously sounded to them like the chattering of a bird, acquired the power of speaking what they could understand. For how can it be conceived possible that a dove should really speak with the voice of a man? Lastly, by calling the dove black the Dodonaeans indicated that the woman was an Egyptian.
quote: The Egyptians were also the first to introduce solemn assemblies, processions, and litanies to the gods; of all which the Greeks were taught the use by them. It seems to me a sufficient proof of this that in Egypt these practices have been established from remote antiquity, while in Greece they are only recently known.
quote: The Egyptians first made it a point of religion to have no converse with women in the sacred places, and not to enter them without washing, after such converse. Almost all other nations, except the Greeks and the Egyptians, act differently, regarding man as in this matter under no other law than the brutes.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I'd be cautious about attributing Greek gods to Egyptians ones. In the example that you point out, it is merely a common custom of the Greeks identifying their own native god with an Egyptian one. In the case of Amun being identified with Zeus. Amun and Zeus are two totally different deities from different cultures with the former being much older. The cult of Amun was later incorporated as Zeus Amun in the Libyan areas of Egypt after Alexander's conquest. But Gebel Barkal's prominence dates back to predynastic times.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
More from Herodotus on the Zeus Ammon ram and Egypto-Sudanese relationship:
quote: 42. Such Egyptians as possess a temple of the Theban Jove, or live in the Thebaic canton, offer no sheep in sacrifice, but only goats; for the Egyptians do not all worship the same gods, excepting Isis and Osiris, the latter of whom they say is the Grecian Bacchus. Those, on the contrary, who possess a temple dedicated to Mendes, or belong to the Mendesian canton, abstain from offering goats, and sacrifice sheep instead. The Thebans, and such as imitate them in their practice, give the following account of the origin of the custom:- "Hercules," they say, "wished of all things to see Jove, but Jove did not choose to be seen of him. At length, when Hercules persisted, Jove hit on a device- to flay a ram, and, cutting off his head, hold the head before him, and cover himself with the fleece. In this guise he showed himself to Hercules." Therefore the Egyptians give their statues of Jupiter the face of a ram: and from them the practice has passed to the Ammonians, who are a joint colony of Egyptians and Ethiopians, speaking a language between the two; hence also, in my opinion, the latter people took their name of Ammonians, since the Egyptian name for Jupiter is Amun. Such, then, is the reason why the Thebans do not sacrifice rams, but consider them sacred animals. Upon one day in the year, however, at the festival of Jupiter, they slay a single ram, and stripping off the fleece, cover with it the statue of that god, as he once covered himself, and then bring up to the statue of Jove an image of Hercules. When this has been done, the whole assembly beat their breasts in mourning for the ram, and afterwards bury him in a holy sepulchre.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Why do you always post a link to nowhere? Do you even realise you are doing this?
Posts: 4165 | From: jamaica | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged |
The astute among us hover our cursor before assuming links.
The jackasses, however, just follow any carrot in front of their face.
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Wow, from looking at past threads it seems as if Mary has a long history of denying not only Egyptian prototypes for the Hebrew culture and Greek classical philosophy but also Greek religion as well! This is why Mary is afraid to enter the house that haunts her so.
posted
Why would a Greek delegation go to Kemet to confirm or ask for rules governing the Olympic games? 26th dyn. under Amasis.
Posts: 6546 | From: japan | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic