posted                         

You may also notice that the man is placed before the women, with respect to the direction they're facing.





..In Mdu Ntr...



Is it because behind every great man, there's simply a woman? Is it sexist?

Is this always the case??

quote:

---

Originally posted by Myra Wysinger:
From the artist point of view it illustrates that Kemet wasn't a sexist society.

.

---

...but most of the time, you'll find, Kemetians had things in order. (just joking, women in front of men is just fine)



btw, if one is observant, one will notice that some of the people (quite a few) in the above pictures show their ears, which contradicts nothing I've said earlier.

It's just likely they were showin their real hair, like these ladies:



and unlike these ones:



peace, I'm quite done postin pics ... for a while..

Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Much of Moorish culture is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian culture.

---

Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Much of Moorish culture is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian culture.

---

Examples?

---

Writing, architecture, landscaping, science and so on. Put it this way, the culture of Northwest Africa from after the Muslim invasions was a product of older cultural traditions from Egypt mixed with Persian and Greek elements. However, the culture and style of the North African Islamic culture was distinct from that elsewhere in the Islamic world and much of that distinction comes from the local traditions that influenced the Islamic community in North Africa. And the most prominent of the local cultural traditions was that of Egypt. A lot of the cultural traditions in North West Africa actually trace their roots back to North East Africa and the Sahara.

The fancy gardens, the pottery, the inlaid furniture, the clothing, the architecture and many other aspects of Moorish culture directly trace their roots back to Egypt. But many of these elements also have roots from Arabia, Persia, Babylon and India as well.

Pottery styles from AE which remind me a lot of Moroccan and other north African pottery:







Inlaid furniture which was a significant part of the Moorish style:






The artwork and detail that covered every surface of many buildings and major monuments:



With some of the decorative details reminding me a lot of the patterns in AE art (especially some tile patterns of North West Africa):



The clothing, including the white linen garments and heavily striped garments and head coverings, which are HIGHLY reminiscent of AE art work:

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Much of Moorish culture is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian culture.

---

Examples?

---

Writing, architecture, landscaping, science and so on.

---

quote:

---

Doug M. writes:

Put it this way, the culture of Northwest Africa from after the Muslim invasions was a product of older cultural traditions from Egypt mixed with Persian and Greek elements. However, the culture and style of the North African Islamic culture was distinct from that elsewhere in the Islamic world and much of that distinction comes from the local traditions that influenced the Islamic community in North Africa. And the most prominent of the local cultural traditions was that of Egypt. A lot of the cultural traditions in North West Africa actually trace their roots back to North East Africa and the Sahara.

---

Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Much of Moorish culture is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian culture.

---

Examples?

---

Writing, architecture, landscaping, science and so on.

---

Can you examine in relative detail how these cultural traits *directly* come from Ancient Egypt, and accordingly, how they couldn't have arrived from elsewhere. Also, elaborate on the "so on", if you will, please.

quote:

---

Doug M. writes:

Put it this way, the culture of Northwest Africa from after the Muslim invasions was a product of older cultural traditions from Egypt mixed with Persian and Greek elements. However, the culture and style of the North African Islamic culture was distinct from that elsewhere in the Islamic world and much of that distinction comes from the local traditions that influenced the Islamic community in North Africa. And the most prominent of the local cultural traditions was that of Egypt. A lot of the cultural traditions in North West Africa actually trace their roots back to North East Africa and the Sahara.

---

Not an unreasonable observation.

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Although there have been great changes over the four thousand years of its existence, it is still not difficult to demonstrate that modern Arabic script is the direct descendant of what we call Egyptian hieratic. The following Arabic characters are all identical or very close to their hieratic ancestors with exactly the same sounds: J, D, T, K, Q, R, H, F, S, in addition to all of the numerals, which with slight transposition come directly from ancient Egyptian hieratic. Here are some examples demonstrating the direct descent of Arabic letters from the Egyptian hieratic. In each case, two Arabic characters are presented so that you can see the true shape of the letter, i.e. without the final flourish.

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

Read what I said.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Actually, some scholars trace arabic to Egyptian hieratic and not Phoenician:

quote:

---

Although there have been great changes over the four thousand years of its existence, it is still not difficult to demonstrate that modern Arabic script is the direct descendant of what we call Egyptian hieratic. The following Arabic characters are all identical or very close to their hieratic ancestors with exactly the same sounds: J, D, T, K, Q, R, H, F, S, in addition to all of the numerals, which with slight transposition come directly from ancient Egyptian hieratic. Here are some examples demonstrating the direct descent of Arabic letters from the Egyptian hieratic. In each case, two Arabic characters are presented so that you can see the true shape of the letter, i.e. without the final flourish.

---

From: http://www.72languages.com/hieraticrootsofarabic.php

---

Interesting. Does this mean that Arabic, which appears about 3rd century CE [by which time Hieratic had long been phased out], didn't evolve from Nabataean script, which in turn derives from Aramaic - a descendant of Pheonician script? Please elaborate.

Meanwhile...

Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug M:

That chart is incorrect. Persian writing is not a descendant of Arabic.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Also, hieratic was being used for religious documents late into the Greek period, when the word was created by the Greeks.

---

quote:

---

Doug M posts:

It is in hieratic and demotic that you can see the evolution and possible origins of arabic writing.

---

Naturally, Arabic and other "Proto-Sinaitic" descendants are going to bear resemblances to Hieratic, because they all emanate from the same ancestral source. Hieratic being a cursive development of Egyptian hieroglyphs, will naturally appear to bear physical resemblances to cursive descendants of 'Proto-Sinaitic', including Arabic.


Hieratic:



...to be compared with:



^Comparisons between Nabataean, Aramaic, Arabic and Syriac alphabets...which brings me back to this:

Does it mean that Arabic, which appears about 3rd century CE [by which time Hieratic had long been phased out], didn't evolve from Nabataean script, which in turn derives from Aramaic - a descendant of Pheonician script? Please elaborate.

Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

What I am saying is that the origin of these cursive scripts is from heiratic and demotic not SIMPLY from proto-sinaitic.

---

Posts: 233 | Registered: Apr 2007  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian:

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

What I am saying is that the origin of these cursive scripts is from heiratic and demotic not SIMPLY from proto-sinaitic.

---

How? Elaborate.

Bear in mind, that it is deemed that the letters of "Proto-Sinatic" descendants had *evolved* from those of the original "Proto-Sinaitic" script, which itself -- though a descendant of Egyptic script and one that was developed deep within the Nile Valley itself -- is neither Hieratic or Hieroglyphic. This was the whole purpose of placing them under "Proto-Sinaitic" family in the first place.


And remember: The point about similarities being natural due to both the cursive nature of these evolutions/developments, and the shared ancestry between the Hieratic script family and "Proto-Sinaitic" script family. In otherwords, writings with a shared ancestral origin likely underwent similar-looking but possibly independent parallel developments, precisely because of that shared ancetral origin.

Besides, Indus Valley script phylum too has sub-phylums that developed into cursive forms; should it then be said, that these were influenced by those in the Nile Valley too?

-----

Ps - I hope you understand that, by "Persian", the authors of the above mentioned diagram were referring to the more modern and cursive Persian script, perhaps also understood as Farsi script.

---

The direct descendants of proto-sinaitic were not cursive. Cursive writing originated in Egypt. There are no other cursive writing styles as old as heiratic or demotic. Therefore, it isn't simply the case that the influence of Egyptian writing on other written languages stopped with proto-sinaitic, there were continuous influences from Nile Valley writing systems on neighboring scripts. In fact, the Nile Valley was a virtual incubator of writing forms.

More ancient Egyptian cursive script:

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian.:
Doug,

Your attacks against straw horses like, "The direct descendants of proto-sinaitic were not cursive", is entertaining, but my concern at the moment are these pressing unanswered matters...

Show [not tell] me:

— how Arabic script could not possibly have developed from Nabataean script and its predecessor, but directly from Hieratic.

— That all cursive scripts, including those of the Indus Valley, could have only developed from a single ancestor: Hieratic!

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Arabic may have developed from the nabataean script,

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

but the cursive form of the Syriac and other members of this branch of the Afro Asiatic family are derived from the Egyptian INVENTION of cursive writing.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Egyptian cursive is the FIRST cursive script ANYWHERE and had a profound INFLUENCE on the development of cursive scripts around the Mediterranean. Egyptian writing is an ancestor of many of the later Afro Asiatic scripts both in the form of the proto-sinaitic script as well as the CONCEPT of cursive scripts.

---

quote:

---

Doug Writes:

Hindu scripts are a much later development.

---

Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

The first cursive script of the sub family that produced arabic is Syriac. Syriac is a child of Aramaic, but Syriac looks NOTHING like Aramaic.

Aramaic:



There is nothing in Aramaic that presages the cursive form of the Syriac script.

Syriac:



However, there is a STRONG similarity between the cursive form of Syriac and Demotic, at least in form, even if the two are not closely related.

Demotic:



So where did this cursive form of Syriac come from if there is no precursor for such a style in Aramaic?

To me, the only place that such a cursive form could have come from is from the oldest cursive script in existence at the time, which is demotic Egyptian. And this is just but a sample of the demotic alphabet, as there are many variations of it that remain without clear translation.

Now, lets look at time frame. The Syriac script is dated to the 2nd or 3rd century BC and is mainly a liturgical script. It split into 3 versions, partly based on a theological split within the early Christian Church. Demotic at the time of the 3rd or 4th century was largely relegated to liturgical or religious work and Egypt was an important part of the Early Christian church of the time. So it is therefore quite possible that the liturgical traditions of cursive Syriac comes from the liturgical traditions of Egypt, which played an important role in the development of Christianity.

quote:

---

The Syriac script is one of the myriad of Aramaic variants that appeared in the ancient Fertile Crescent around the 1st century CE. It was used to write Syriac, a dialect of the Aramaic language spoken by Assyrians, in northern Mesopotamia (the area near where the modern nations of Syria, Turkey and Iraq intersect) and particularly focused around the city of Edessa.

The earliest Syriac script is called Estrangela, whose name is derived from the Greek word strongulos meaning 'rounded'. Estrangela inscriptions date from as far back as the year 6 CE, and by the 3rd century CE the Bible and Christian theological works had been translated into Syriac. As the city of Edessa became an important Christian center, Syriac spread throughout region as far as Palestine, and even travelled down the Silk Road and all the way to China.

In the year 489 CE, a schism occurred in the Syrian Christian church between the followers of Nestorius of Persia and Jacob of Edessa. This not only split the church but also started the process of splitting the Estrangela script into two branches. The western branch, known as Jacobite, or more correctly Serto, appeared around the 8th century CE and took a much more cursive look than Estrangela. The eastern branch, called Nestorian, developed out of Estrangela more slowly, only showing a slightly distinct look by the 12th century CE.

---

quote:

---

Eventually the most cursive form of hieratic became the demotic which gives no hint of its hieroglyphic origin. By 600 BCE, the hieratic, which was used to write documents on papyri, was retained only for religious writing. The demotic became the every-day script, used for accounting, writing down literature, writings, etc. The following demotic inscription is from the famous Rosetta Stone. It bears no resemblance whatsoever to the hieroglyphic script. In fact, it is so cursive that it resembles more like the Aramaic scripts used around the Fertile Crescent at this time.

---

quote:

---

The Aramaic language was the international trade language of the ancient Middle East between 1000 and 600 BCE, spoken from the Mediterranean coast to the borders of India. Its script, derived from Phoenician and first attested during the 9th century BCE, also became extremely popular and was adopted by many people with or without any previous writing system.

One interesting innovation in Aramaic is the matres lectionis system to indicate certain vowels. Early Phoenician-derived scripts did not have letters for vowels, and so most texts recorded just consonants. Most likely as a consequence of phonetic changes in North Semitic languages, the Aramaeans reused certain letters in the alphabet to represent long vowels. The letter 'aleph was employed to write /ā/, he for /ō/, yodh for /ī/, and waw for /ū/.

Aramaic flowered into myriads of different variants, which eventually became the script of many nations in the Middle East. One important example is the square Hebrew script. Writing, derived from Phoenician, began to appear in Palestine around the 10th century BCE, and the Old Hebrew script was one of them. However, by the 6th century BCE, an Aramaic-derived script, appropriately called the Jewish script, began to replace the Old Hebrew script. It is the Jewish script that eventually evolved into the modern square Hebrew script.

Another important Aramaic offshoot is the Nabataean script, which eventually evolved into the Arabic script.

---

quote:

---

The Elephantine Papyri are a collection of ancient Jewish manuscripts dating from the fifth century BCE. They come from a Jewish community at Elephantine, then called Yeb, the island in the Nile at the border of Nubia, which was probably founded as a military installation in about 650 BCE during Manasseh's reign to assist Pharaoh Psammetichus I in his Nubian campaign. The dry soil of Upper Egypt preserved documents from the Egyptian border fortresses of Elephantine and Syene (Aswan). Hundreds of these Elephantine papyri, written in hieratic and Demotic Egyptian, Aramaic, Greek, Latin and Coptic, span a period of 2000 years. Legal documents and a cache of letters survived, turned up on the local 'gray market' of antiquities starting in the late 19th century, and were scattered into several Western collections.

Though some fragments on papyrus are much older, the largest number of papyri are written in Aramaic, the lingua franca of the Persian Empire, and document the Jewish community among soldiers stationed at Elephantine under Persian rule, 495-399 BCE. The Elephantine documents include letters and legal contracts from family and other archives: divorce documents, the manumission of slaves, and other business, and are a valuable source of knowledge about law, society, religion, language and onomastics, the sometimes surprisingly revealing study of names.

---

quote:

---

The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-Cultural Continuity and Change
This important volume contains 170 documents from the Egyptian border fortresses of Elephantine and Syene (Aswan), which yielded hundreds of papyri in hieratic, Demotic, Aramaic, Greek, Latin and Coptic, spanning a period of 3000 years. The documents include letters from legal documents and accounts from family and other archives, and are thus an invaluable source of knowledge of epistolography, law, society, religion, language and onomastica in this unique site and over this long period of time to scholars of varied disciplines. The volume contains five sections, each containing carefully translated and extensively annotated documents of one language group. Excellent cross-referencing allows the user to trace forerunners and successors. Each section is preceded by an introduction, and the book closes with a glossary of technical terms in five languages.

---

From: http://www.amazon.com/Elephantine-Papyri-English-Cross-Cultural-Continuity/dp/9004101977

These papyri also document the existence of a Jewish temple at Aswan from about 5-600 BCE. This temple dates from the Saite dynasty and is supposedly the result of Psamtik I using mercenaries from Jerusalem.

Psamtik I:

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

code:

---

Alpha.  Demotic "Near Eastern" scripts
k-	1	0
r - 	0	1
n - 	1	0
m - 	0	1(Nabataean)
q -  	0	1
p - 	0	1(first Arabic, then  others)
t(dot)  0	1
b - 	0	1
y -	0	0
` - 	0	1 (Nabataean)
g-	0	1(Aramaic, then Nabataean)
s - 	0	1(Nabataean)
l- 	0 	1         
w-	0	.5(partial resemblance upper hand goes to that vis-à-vis Arabic, when it looks like for Syriac, the curvature was not taken all the way}

---

Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian.:
Doug,

My question to you is: Do you find any similarities at all, across the alleged "Proto-Sinaitic-descended" scripts layed out in the image posted earlier, comparing Aramaic, Nabataean, Arabic and Syriac scripts?

Upon closely examining the letters in the images posted, here's my estimation of similarities based on alphabetic correspondences, not mere random resemblances of letters upon visualization:

code:

---

Alpha.  Demotic "Near Eastern" scripts
k-	1	0
r - 	0	1
n - 	1	0
m - 	0	1(Nabataean)
q -  	0	1
p - 	0	1(first Arabic, then  others)
t(dot)  0	1
b - 	0	1
y -	0	0
` - 	0	1 (Nabataean)
g-	0	1(Aramaic, then Nabataean)
s - 	0	1(Nabataean)
l- 	0 	1         
w-	0	.5(partial resemblance upper hand goes to that vis-à-vis Arabic, when it looks like for Syriac, the curvature was not taken all the way}

---

Looks to me that Syriac is still more inclined towards the other Proto-Sinaitic 'sub-script' counterparts. Specifically how were you making mano a mano comparisons between the letters across the scripts, if not the way I went about it?

You make a case that Aramaic interestingly "began to exhibit many of the more cursive forms" around about the time when Assyrians invaded Egypt, but Aramaic isn't cursive. As for the Nabataean script, which allegedly developed from Aramaic, it emerged only at ca. 3rd century BC, lest you are referring to the Brahmi branch, which isn't exactly cursive either and whose dating to anywhere between ca. 6th century and 4th century isn't as clear as its more confident dating to ca. 3rd century BC. And even if one were to accept the high end dates attributed to Brahmi, Syraic is not an alleged descendant of Brahmi. Alleged cursive variants of Brahmi script appear from the 3rd century onwards, well beyond the origin date attributed to Demotic [6th century BC]. But what the heck; I'm willing to entertain a demonstration showing how Brahmi must have developed from the more cursive Demotic.

You earlier said that all cursive scripts derived from Hieratic, as opposed to Demotic, and when pressed to demonstrate how this extends to southeast Asian scripts, you're mum about it. But the question that also needs to be asked about that, is why then was Hieratic simply not adopted earlier on, as opposed to proto-Sinaitic? Hieratic had been around since the pre-dynastic era.

---

quote:

---

From 700 BCE, the language began to spread in all directions, but lost much of its homogeneity. Different dialects emerged in Mesopotamia, Babylonia, the Levant and Egypt. However, the Akkadian-influenced Aramaic of Assyria, and then Babylon, started to come to the fore. As described in 2 Kings 18:26, Hezekiah, king of Judah, negotiates with Assyrian ambassadors in Aramaic so that the common people would not understand. Around 600 BCE, Adon, a Canaanite king, uses Aramaic to write to the Egyptian Pharaoh.

'Chaldee' or 'Chaldean Aramaic' used to be common terms for the Aramaic of the Chaldean dynasty of Babylonia. It was used to describe Biblical Aramaic, which was, however, written in a later style. It is not to be confused with the modern language Chaldean Neo-Aramaic.

[edit] Imperial Aramaic

Around 500 BCE, following the Achaemenid conquest of Mesopotamia under Darius I, Aramaic (as had been used in that region) was adopted by the conquerors as the "vehicle for written communication between the different regions of the vast empire with its different peoples and languages. The use of a single official language, which modern scholarship has dubbed Official Aramaic or Imperial Aramaic, can be assumed to have greatly contributed to the astonishing success of the Achaemenids in holding their far-flung empire together for as long as they did".[5] In 1955, Richard Frye questioned the classification of Imperial Aramaic as an 'official language', noting that no surviving edict expressly and unambiguously accorded that status to any particular language.[6] Frye reclassifies Imperial Aramaic as the lingua franca of the Achaemenid territories, suggesting then that the Achaemenid-era use of Aramaic was more pervasive than generally thought.

Imperial Aramaic was highly standardised; its orthography was based more on historical roots than any spoken dialect, and the inevitable influence of Persian gave the language a new clarity and robust flexibility. For centuries after the fall of the Achaemenid Empire (in 331 BCE), Imperial Aramaic — or near enough for it to be recognisable — would remain an influence on the various native Iranian languages. Aramaic script and — as ideograms — Aramaic vocabulary would survive as the essential characteristics of the Pahlavi writing system.[7]

One of the largest collections of Imperial Aramaic texts is that of the Persepolis fortification tablets, which number about five hundred.[8] Many of the extant documents witnessing to this form of Aramaic come from Egypt, and Elephantine in particular. Of them, the best known is the Wisdom of Ahiqar, a book of instructive aphorisms quite similar in style to the biblical book of Proverbs. Achaemenid Aramaic is sufficiently uniform that it is often difficult to know where any particular example of the language was written. Only careful examination reveals the occasional loan word from a local language.

A group of thirty Aramaic documents from Bactria have been recently discovered. An analysis was published in November 2006. The texts, which were rendered on leather, reflect the use of Aramaic in the fourth-century-BCE Achaemenid administration of Bactria and Sogdiana.[9]

---

quote:

---

Semitic language originally spoken by the ancient Aramaeans. The earliest Aramaic texts are inscriptions in an alphabet of Phoenician origin found in the northern Levant dating from c. 850 to 600 BC. The period 600 – 200 BC saw a dramatic expansion of Aramaic, leading to the development of a standard form known as Imperial Aramaic. In later centuries, as "Standard Literary Aramaic," it became a linguistic model. Late (or Classical) Aramaic (c. AD 200 – 1200) has an abundant literature, both in Syriac and in Mandaic (see Mandaeanism). With the rise of Islam, Arabic rapidly supplanted Aramaic as a vernacular in South Asia. Modern Aramaic (Neo-Aramaic) comprises West Neo-Aramaic, spoken in three villages northeast of Damascus, Syria, and East Neo-Aramaic, a group of languages spoken in scattered settlements of Jews and Christians in southeastern Turkey, northern Iraq, and northwestern Iran, and by modern Mandaeans in the Shatt Al-'Arab. Since c. 1900 persecution has forced most contemporary East Neo-Aramaic-speakers, who number several hundred thousand, into diaspora communities around the world.

---

From: http://www.answers.com/topic/aramaic

Again, the growth of Imperial Aramaic, as a distinct form separate from its Phoenician forebear took place at about the same time as the growth and expansion of Assyria and its conquest of Egypt in 600 BC. Evidence for Imperial Aramaic comes mainly from Egypt in the body of the Elephantine papyri mentioned earlier.

http://books.google.com/books?id=pZ53zpMQNLEC&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=Imperial+Aramaic&source=web&ots=-e1AszYPUB&sig=JxybsrmvgN2XCft5-gt5dGIcKEE&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=12&ct= result#PPA15,M1

Time frame of Aramaic development:

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian.:
Doug,

My question to you is: Do you find any similarities at all, across the alleged "Proto-Sinaitic-descended" scripts layed out in the image posted earlier, comparing Aramaic, Nabataean, Arabic and Syriac scripts?

Upon closely examining the letters in the images posted, here's my estimation of similarities based on alphabetic correspondences, not mere random resemblances of letters upon visualization:

code:

---

Alpha.  Demotic "Near Eastern" scripts
k-	1	0
r - 	0	1
n - 	1	0
m - 	0	1(Nabataean)
q -  	0	1
p - 	0	1(first Arabic, then  others)
t(dot)  0	1
b - 	0	1
y -	0	0
` - 	0	1 (Nabataean)
g-	0	1(Aramaic, then Nabataean)
s - 	0	1(Nabataean)
l- 	0 	1         
w-	0	.5(partial resemblance upper hand goes to that vis-à-vis Arabic, when it looks like for Syriac, the curvature was not taken all the way}

---

Looks to me that Syriac is still more inclined towards the other Proto-Sinaitic 'sub-script' counterparts. Specifically how were you making mano a mano comparisons between the letters across the scripts, if not the way I went about it?

You make a case that Aramaic interestingly "began to exhibit many of the more cursive forms" around about the time when Assyrians invaded Egypt, but Aramaic isn't cursive. As for the Nabataean script, which allegedly developed from Aramaic, it emerged only at ca. 3rd century BC, lest you are referring to the Brahmi branch, which isn't exactly cursive either and whose dating to anywhere between ca. 6th century and 4th century isn't as clear as its more confident dating to ca. 3rd century BC. And even if one were to accept the high end dates attributed to Brahmi, Syraic is not an alleged descendant of Brahmi. Alleged cursive variants of Brahmi script appear from the 3rd century onwards, well beyond the origin date attributed to Demotic [6th century BC]. But what the heck; I'm willing to entertain a demonstration showing how Brahmi must have developed from the more cursive Demotic.

You earlier said that all cursive scripts derived from Hieratic, as opposed to Demotic, and when pressed to demonstrate how this extends to southeast Asian scripts, you're mum about it. But the question that also needs to be asked about that, is why then was Hieratic simply not adopted earlier on, as opposed to proto-Sinaitic? Hieratic had been around since the pre-dynastic era.

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Again, the growth of Imperial Aramaic, as a distinct form separate from its Phoenician forebear took place at about the same time as the growth and expansion of Assyria and its conquest of Egypt in 600 BC. Evidence for Imperial Aramaic comes mainly from Egypt in the body of the Elephantine papyri mentioned earlier.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian.:
Doug,

My question to you is: Do you find any similarities at all, across the alleged "Proto-Sinaitic-descended" scripts layed out in the image posted earlier, comparing Aramaic, Nabataean, Arabic and Syriac scripts?

Upon closely examining the letters in the images posted, here's my estimation of similarities based on alphabetic correspondences, not mere random resemblances of letters upon visualization:

code:

---

Alpha.  Demotic "Near Eastern" scripts
k-	1	0
r - 	0	1
n - 	1	0
m - 	0	1(Nabataean)
q -  	0	1
p - 	0	1(first Arabic, then  others)
t(dot)  0	1
b - 	0	1
y -	0	0
` - 	0	1 (Nabataean)
g-	0	1(Aramaic, then Nabataean)
s - 	0	1(Nabataean)
l- 	0 	1         
w-	0	.5(partial resemblance upper hand goes to that vis-à-vis Arabic, when it looks like for Syriac, the curvature was not taken all the way}

---

Looks to me that Syriac is still more inclined towards the other Proto-Sinaitic 'sub-script' counterparts. Specifically how were you making mano a mano comparisons between the letters across the scripts, if not the way I went about it?

You make a case that Aramaic interestingly "began to exhibit many of the more cursive forms" around about the time when Assyrians invaded Egypt, but Aramaic isn't cursive. As for the Nabataean script, which allegedly developed from Aramaic, it emerged only at ca. 3rd century BC, lest you are referring to the Brahmi branch, which isn't exactly cursive either and whose dating to anywhere between ca. 6th century and 4th century isn't as clear as its more confident dating to ca. 3rd century BC. And even if one were to accept the high end dates attributed to Brahmi, Syraic is not an alleged descendant of Brahmi. Alleged cursive variants of Brahmi script appear from the 3rd century onwards, well beyond the origin date attributed to Demotic [6th century BC]. But what the heck; I'm willing to entertain a demonstration showing how Brahmi must have developed from the more cursive Demotic.

You earlier said that all cursive scripts derived from Hieratic, as opposed to Demotic, and when pressed to demonstrate how this extends to southeast Asian scripts, you're mum about it. But the question that also needs to be asked about that, is why then was Hieratic simply not adopted earlier on, as opposed to proto-Sinaitic? Hieratic had been around since the pre-dynastic era.

---

Actually I never said anything about southeast asian scripts.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

My only point is that not only did Egypt provide the basis of the alphabets of the Eastern Mediterranean, but it also provided the basis for the development of cursive forms in these alphabets, with the cursive form NOT being a separate and independent development.

---

Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Arabic writing is derived from the Egyptian writing.

---

quote:

---

Brāhmī is believed by most scholars to be derived from a Semitic script such as the Imperial Aramaic alphabet, as was clearly the case for the contemporary Kharosthi alphabet that arose in a part of northwest Indian under the control of the Achaemenid Empire. Rhys Davids suggests that writing may have been introduced to India from the Middle East by traders. Another possibility is with the Achaemenid conquest in the late 6th century BCE,[citation needed] or that it was a planned invention under Ashoka as a prerequiste for his edicts.

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Actually, what I originally said was:

quote:

---

Arabic writing is derived from the Egyptian writing.

---

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Which you questioned and I clarified as a case of Egyptian influence on the development of cursive forms of writing in other Afro Asiatic derived scripts,

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

ALL of which derive from Egyptian writing to begin with.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

The only straw men here are those YOU are creating in trying to create TECHNICALITIES of why the development of Egyptian cursive writing was NOT influential on the development of cursive forms elsewhere in the region.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

I never said that these scripts "directly" developed from Egyptian writing, even though they ultimately do since they all derive from proto-sinaitic, which IS directly from Egyptian writing.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

What I said and what you continue to ignore is that the CURSIVE FORMS of these scripts reflect INFLUENCE from Egyptian cursive forms on the development of later cursive scripts.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

As far as Brahmic script is concerned, again it IS derived from Egyptian,

---

Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ausarian.:

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Actually, what I originally said was:

quote:

---

Arabic writing is derived from the Egyptian writing.

---

---

One good thing about web forums like this one, is that once you've posted and editing time elapses, you cannot take back what you "originally" said:

—Doug wrote:

Much of Moorish culture is a direct descendant of ancient Egyptian culture.

—I asked:

Examples?

—Doug answers:

Writing, architecture, landscaping, science and so on.

—I ask:

Can you examine in relative detail how these cultural traits *directly* come from Ancient Egypt, and accordingly, how they couldn't have arrived from elsewhere. Also, elaborate on the "so on", if you will, please.

—And Doug answers:

Arabic writing is derived from the Egyptian writing.

The gardens of Morocco and North West Africa with pools other features are MOST SIMILAR to the gardens of ancient Egypt which also featured pools and channels.

The science of the Moors was taken from the science of older cultures, which included Egypt

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Which you questioned and I clarified as a case of Egyptian influence on the development of cursive forms of writing in other Afro Asiatic derived scripts,

---

Actually, you changed your claim from saying that Arabic directly derived from ancient Egyptian script to acknowledging its descent from Nabataean script, only after being pressed.

Recap: Your claims about Hieratic, and then the switch to Demotic, being used to develop cursive scripts of the "Near East" didn't withstand scrutiny.

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

ALL of which derive from Egyptian writing to begin with.

---

Saying that descendants of "Near Eastern" scripts *ultimately* derive from ancient Egypt, is a far cry from saying that they derive directly from ancient Egyptian.

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

The only straw men here are those YOU are creating in trying to create TECHNICALITIES of why the development of Egyptian cursive writing was NOT influential on the development of cursive forms elsewhere in the region.

---

Hate to break it to you, but one cannot creat a strawman out of something that hasn't been proven to have merit.

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

I never said that these scripts "directly" developed from Egyptian writing, even though they ultimately do since they all derive from proto-sinaitic, which IS directly from Egyptian writing.

---

See above - Records don't lie.

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

What I said and what you continue to ignore is that the CURSIVE FORMS of these scripts reflect INFLUENCE from Egyptian cursive forms on the development of later cursive scripts.

---

That's quite funny; considering I've been *persistently* trying to get you to prove your claim all this time...without success. That's the anti-thesis of ignoring.

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

As far as Brahmic script is concerned, again it IS derived from Egyptian,

---

OK. And...?

---

Ps -Fact is, to show that cursive scripts couldn't have been independently developed at different times and in different places, you have to demonstrate how they all come from a single common cursive ancestor. This hasn't been achieved to date.

---

Posts: 8896 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Actually, the only one making straw men is you.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

I said that much of Moorish culture is directly descended from ancient Egyptian, but much is not all and therefore, does not mean that everything in Moorish culture came from Egypt.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

Likewise, this includes Arabic script, which is indeed directly derived from the development of CURSIVE SCRIPTS in Egypt

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

The part YOU are disagreeing with is that the cursive forms of Egyptian scripts had ANY influence on later scripts in the region

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

which is not simply an issue of what is directly versus indirectly descendant from Egyptian scripts.

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

You are trying to find cracks or errors in my words

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

to justify ignoring the facts that have been posted

---

quote:

---

Doug M writes:

, in order to pretend that Egyptian scripts and culture did not have a profound impact on other scripts and cultures in the region, which it did.

---

Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged |