posted
"You quote from a 1915 source to edify me?" "You have to be careful with EW Budge, because some of his stuff is outdated..."
I am always amused by the idea that reference sources older than ten years are "out of date" and therefore worthless. It is the "new" is "improved" delusion (I just can't wait for the new edition of the "Rosetta Stone") :
If one chooses to believe this nonsense, fine. For those, who know better and wish to broaden their knowledge and insight into Ancient Egypt, I highly recommend "Osiris and the Egyptian Resurrection, Vol1;Dover" by EW Budge, originally printed in the "stone age" of 1911 and still available at Borders, Amazon.Com, or your local library.
Interestingly, one of Budge's *later thesis was, (and this was long before the arrival of Egyptology professors C.A. Diop or T. Obenga) --
"The Egyptians were Africans, and their manners and customs can therefore be illustrated and explained by those other African peoples."
He thusly devotes an entire chapter to: "The African Belief in God and the Doctrine of Last Things --pp348-383
He also has a chapter on the origins of Osiris' name, and gives the various ways it was pronounced (Asar, Ausar, Usiri, etc.) and what the name means. I personally don't think he provided an adequate explanation here but it can get you close. For example, I was able to deduce my own idea of what the name really meant: --from "Wose"; power; throne; scepter and "Iri" to create or fashion -- Thus, "The Creator of Power" --and you have "Isi" or (royal) seat; throne I concluded that Osiris means "Creator of the Power" and Isis is "The Power"; which I also think illustrates the ideology of the Matriarchy.
Without Budge, I would not have had the information to make what I consider to be an informed guess.
This is the type of information that is available in this reference source. It provides you with a tremendous insight into Ancient Egyptian civilization in general and Ancient Egyptian religion in particular.
*Budges earlier thesis, which reflected Western pre-concepts of Ancient Egypt at the time, I'm sure later was embarrassing to him.
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 11 June 2004).]
posted
Sure you can use Budge as a stepping stone,but the problem Budge never kept consistent with new archaeological findings. You have to balance old data with more new data to equalize scholarship. Otherwise,people would always be stuck in the same frame of reference. Some of what Budge wrote was downright racist just like many Egyptologist from his time. He would often blame the African element of Egyptian civlization for their downfall. Know I know you certainly don't believe that,right?
How about trying to read some more recent up to date Egyptology books? Budge is a good stepping stone though.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Sure you can use Budge as a stepping stone,but the problem Budge never kept consistent with new archaeological findings. You have to balance old data with more new data to equalize scholarship. Otherwise,people would always be stuck in the same frame of reference. Some of what Budge wrote was downright racist just like many Egyptologist from his time. He would often blame the African element of Egyptian civlization for their downfall. Know I know you certainly don't believe that,right?
How about trying to read some more recent up to date Egyptology books? Budge is a good stepping stone though.
We're fundamentally saying the same things. As far as recent books, have you read this "Egypt, Trunk of the Tree" c2003; I forget the author's name. He has a chapter, rare in books on Egypt, regarding Egypt's ethnicity, which essentially restates the old argument that "the Ancient Egyptians resembled the fine races of Europe." It's what I think Diop referred to as the counter-revolutions. There is also a new book out "Middle Egyptian", about the Egyptian language, which closely reflects budge's work.
But I agree, new works must absolutely be read if one is to keep abreast, but Budge is an excellent beginner's source.
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 11 June 2004).]
posted
Wally,the book you are reffering to was a book written by a journalist for Radio France BBC. He is not an athropologist or Egyptologist. Most modern Egyptologist don't think like him except for maybe a few. When I said recent books I mean books like Egypt in Africa by David O'Connor,Egypt in Africa by Theodore Celneko,or Oxford History of Ancient Egypt by Ian Shaw.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
BTW,Wally tell me where you get your pictures of Egyptians for your website. You never did answer me about the Coptic man wearing white. Could you please tell me where you obtained that picture? Was if from a book or website?
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Wally,the book you are reffering to was a book written by a journalist for Radio France BBC. He is not an athropologist or Egyptologist. Most modern Egyptologist don't think like him except for maybe a few. When I said recent books I mean books like Egypt in Africa by David O'Connor,Egypt in Africa by Theodore Celneko,or Oxford History of Ancient Egypt by Ian Shaw.
I'm familiar with the Oxford book, and the other two sound like good reference sources. Thanks.
But what I was alluding to was something which anyone following this can prove for themselves:
One day, go down to Borders books or Barnes and Nobles and grab all the current books about Ancient Egypt, grab a seat, maybe some coffee, and compare and contrast these books. See if you don't discover the following:
A) Both in the illustrations and in the text how remarkably similar they all are to one another. -----Images a) The ubiquitous bust of Nefertiti, and rarely if ever the more than a dozen other images of her b) The mummy of Rameses II, very often with his hair "slick combed"; a mummy which is probably not that of the real Rameses, but who in any case (too me) resembles a Hadendowa Beja (Kiplings "fuzzy wuzzys") c) The sitting scribe with the silly grin on his face I can go on, but you begin to get the picture... -----Text Compare how they all repeat what I call the party line. For example, whenever they mention the Egyptian name for Egypt - "Kmt" they say "It means Black, after the color of the soil." Says who??? But I cover that on my website, so I'm not going to deal with that here. With perhaps the exception of the texts you listed, the majority of books on Ancient Egypt published today shed very little new light on Ancient Egypt.
You may also be guilty of the same mistake that I often make by confusing Budge with Breasted. I always have to check myself on that one...Was it Budge or was it Breasted? If you read the preface to Budge's Egyptian dictionary he clearly makes a break with the then school of "Egyptology" which tried to make the Egyptian language Semitic. Budge states clearly that the Egyptian language was an African language that originated in the Great Lakes region of Central Africa. This was a revolutionary thing for him to say at the time. Budge, of course, still had his European bias and deceptions. -- He translates "Kammau" to "Egyptians", when he knows what the actual translation is and of course he knew that the etymology of the word "Egyptian" is HtKpth...
One of my favorite expressions is "You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater" His revolutionary expositions is the "baby", his bias is the "bathwater" and we should be able to tell the difference between the two.
As far as the picture of the Copt, if I recall correctly (its been awhile) it was from the web which had coverage of the Coptic demonstrations in Egypt. I think it was on several sites...
So I say to anyone, spend a pleasant day at Borders or Barnes and Nobles...
[This message has been edited by Wally (edited 12 June 2004).]
posted
I have seen exactly what you mention in various books at Barnes and Nobels or other various book stores. My information tend to come from various books I read at the library or from books also published at American Unversity of Cairo. Too bad I cannot read French or I would be reading French journals and periodicals.
You might want to try looking up journal article if you can Wally,for many times journal articles shed more light than popular books written by journalist at Barnes and Nobels. This always works for me. You might also want to check out books through interlibrary loan.
The French and other Europeans are light years ahead most American establishments in African history and Egyptology.
BTW,Wally,do you still have the website you found the picture of the Coptic man from?
Let me also point out that many times you can't judge ethnicity of a mummy simply by it's frontal apperance. The Saline solution in the embalming materials sometimes leaves hair straightened or with various unnatural colors.
If you can you might want to check out some books written by Kent R. Weeks and Edward Wente who X-rayed the mummies. Full reports of the mummies physigomany is in the books X-raying the Pharoahs and X-ray Atlas of the Pharoahs. Weeks found that the 18th dyansty had strong ties to Beja people.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: I have seen exactly what you mention in various books at Barnes and Nobels or other various book stores. My information tend to come from various books I read at the library or from books also published at American Unversity of Cairo. Too bad I cannot read French or I would be reading French journals and periodicals.
You might want to try looking up journal article if you can Wally,for many times journal articles shed more light than popular books written by journalist at Barnes and Nobels. This always works for me. You might also want to check out books through interlibrary loan.
The French and other Europeans are light years ahead most American establishments in African history and Egyptology.
BTW,Wally,do you still have the website you found the picture of the Coptic man from?
Let me also point out that many times you can't judge ethnicity of a mummy simply by it's frontal apperance. The Saline solution in the embalming materials sometimes leaves hair straightened or with various unnatural colors.
If you can you might want to check out some books written by Kent R. Weeks and Edward Wente who X-rayed the mummies. Full reports of the mummies physigomany is in the books X-raying the Pharoahs and X-ray Atlas of the Pharoahs. Weeks found that the 18th dyansty had strong ties to Beja people.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic