posted
Jasper cylinder seal: monstrous lions and lion-headed eagles, Mesopotamia, Uruk Period (4100 BC3000 BC) displaying similar Serpopard motif to the Narmer Palette, Louvre
Narmer's Vizier(2nd in command)and sandal-bearer has a cylinder seal around his neck. Anyone know if this seal is similar to any Uruk cylinder seals? Also, any references to a more precise date on the Uruk seal?
Posts: 644 | Registered: May 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Notice how it seems the hands are clasped together as in the way Sumerian statues are often depicted? This is predynastic Egyptian. Coincidence?
Must be, because there is nothing like this in chronologically similar layers in the so-called "Near East". Furthermore, finger lines of the figure to the right are seen on both its left hand and right hand. The so-called "Uruk" examples don't sport that; they only show the finger lines of one hand that is covering the other.
As for the "Serpopards", this is what I noted elsewhere:
On a passing note, the long-necked feline creatures on the recto side of Narmer palette are hard to ignore. Some observers have dubbed them as "serpopards". Some have interpret them as supposed "imports" from the so-called "Near East", predicated on the flimsy standpoint that similar creature is featured in Uruk artifact dated to more or less contemporary time frame as the Narmer palette, like the Uruk seal below, reportedly dated to c. 3000 BC:
Notwithstanding such claims, the Nile Valley example is actually dated earlier than the "Near Eastern" examples. Anytime there are some parallel cultural/artistic expressions in the Nile Valley and the so-called Near East, these same characters tend to give priority to the so-called "Near East" as the most likely source, as if to tacitly say that the Nile Valley can never be conceived as the source (it is virtually impossible) and therefore, must always be the recipient of cultural diffusion. Note that the Uruk serpopards have much longer tails than the Narmer palette rendition, with their tails almost as long as their necks. The mythic creatures themselves may well serve as "guardians" against enemies or adversarial elements, just as that served by other mythic creatures like the Sphinx.
Another "Near Eastern" import from the Nile Valley, could well be the concept of the sphinx.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
And what about the cylinder seals themselves? Another copied design from Egypt?
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well it doesn't seem you have any better data. Can you provide me with an example of Egyptian cylinder seals preceding that of any in the Middle East?
What about the written language of Egypt? Is there much proof of a proto type of writing preceding the actual dynastic use of the written language itself? Did it appear out of thin air?
It seems as if it appeared suddenly as if influenced from somewhere else.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Better data for what? Your comment is strange. I already gave you my take on the question of cylinder seals, and questioned you on it, since you brought up the matter.
With regard to the writing, I get the impression that you are ignorant of proto-hieroglyph items of the Nile, so as to bring you to the conclusion that it appears "suddenly". In any case, I'll just repeat something I posted elsewhere:
He [Gunther Dreyer] concluded his presentation by noting similarities between specific Egyptian and Mesopotamian objects and suggesting that perhaps there is an initial influence of Egyptian writing on Mesopotamia because there are signs on Mesopotamian objects that are only "readable" from the standpoint of the Egyptian language, but not the Mesopotamian language. - Mario Beatty, "Too Much Stuff": Recent Finds in Predynastic Egypt
Writing had independently been invented in different parts of the world; so, where the earliest writing emerged is not as important a question as whose writing influence who, imo. Contemporary European writing is ultimately a derivative of a Nile Valley script. A case is being made in the excerpt above, that Nile Valley script reached "Mesopotamia" earlier on as well. Certainly, it reached the Levant where it would be modified into Phoenician script, and from there, as they say, the rest is history.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^Indeed. The notion of "sudden appearance" is not supported by the scholar you reference- Dreyer. [quote by Dreyer himself:]
"Most of them are documents, records of linen and oil delivered to the King Scorpion, taxes, short notes, numbers, lists of kings' names, and names of institutions.. The writing is in the form of line drawings of animals, plants and mountains and is the earliest evidence that hieroglyphics used by later-day Pharaonic dynasties did not rise as phoenix from the ashes but developed gradually.. Although the Egyptian writing is in the form of symbols it can be called true writing because each symbol stands for a consonant and makes up syllables. In principle Ancient Egyptians were able to express themselves clearly.."
--Nevine El-Aref, "Did writing originate in Egypt?" Al-Ahram Weekly: 1 - 7 April 1999, Issue No. 423
Of Dreyer's finds, Archaeology Magazine states that they
"...challenge the commonly held belief that early logographs, pictographic symbols representing a specific place, object, or quantity, first evolved into more complex phonetic symbols in Mesopotamia." -- Larkin Mitchell, "Earliest Egyptian Glyphs," Archaeology, Volume 52 Number 2, March/April 1999
And indeed writing has been developed independently in several places. Seeking some sort of Mesopotamian inspiration is not necessary. Unfortunately some do this and even have claimed some sort of Mesopotamian influence on ancient Egypt as regards religion, but scholarly data actually finds more religious connections between Egypt and Northeast Africa rather than the "Middle East":
"A large number of gods go back to prehistoric times. The images of a cow and star goddess (Hathor), the falcon (Horus), and the human-shaped figures of the fertility god (Min) can be traced back to that period. Some rites, such as the "running of the Apil-bull," the "hoeing of the ground," and other fertility and hunting rites (e.g., the hippopotamus hunt) presumably date from early times.. Connections with the religions in southwest Asia cannot be traced with certainty." "It is doubtful whether Osiris can be regarded as equal to Tammuz or Adonis, or whether Hathor is related to the "Great Mother." There are closer relations with northeast African religions. The numerous animal cults (especially bovine cults and panther gods) and details of ritual dresses (animal tails, masks, grass aprons, etc) probably are of African origin. The kinship in particular shows some African elements, such as the king as the head ritualist (i.e., medicine man), the limitations and renewal of the reign (jubilees, regicide), and the position of the king's mother (a matriarchal element). Some of them can be found among the Ethiopians in Napata and Meroe, others among the Prenilotic tribes (Shilluk)."
-- Encyclopedia Britannica 1984 ed. Macropedia Article, Vol 6: "Egyptian Religion" , pg 506-508
Posts: 5905 | From: The Hammer | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
What is strikingly different about the design or use of both types of cylinder seals from each culture? Do they both not have the same basic design and were used to do the same basic function? Are you implying that the Egyptians had invented the first cylinder seals?
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
"Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, c3250 BC. Said to have come from Naqada, this figure is named after the Reverend William MacGregor in whose collection it was until 1922. The makers of early Predynastic sculptures knew as yet none of the conventions of later Egyptian art. This results in the curiously un-Egyptian impression their creations exert From the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford."
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
Posts: 175 | From: Who knows? | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^One thing that gives that statue away as possibly being Sumerian in its design is the eyebrows. Sumerian statues had that same type of prominent feature.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm still waiting for some really strong evidence of a proto form of a written language during the predynastic period and beyond. Not just a few hundred symbols that predate the dawning of the first dynasties only marginally.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
I don't know. You tell me; what is the earliest accurate date on Uruk cylinder seals? I find these claims or insinuations about some Uruk-origin for Dynastic Egyptian culture funny, because they are strikingly different. People who make these claims apparently know next to nothing about AE culture.
What is strikingly different about the design or use of both types of cylinder seals from each culture? Do they both not have the same basic design and were used to do the same basic function? Are you implying that the Egyptians had invented the first cylinder seals?
Read *carefully* what you are citing. I said Dynastic Egyptian culture is strikingly different from that of the Uruk.
quote:Originally posted by Spiralman:
Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, 3250 B.C.
"Basalt statuette known as 'MacGregor Man', Ancient Egyptian, predynastic period, c3250 BC. Said to have come from Naqada, this figure is named after the Reverend William MacGregor in whose collection it was until 1922. The makers of early Predynastic sculptures knew as yet none of the conventions of later Egyptian art. This results in the curiously un-Egyptian impression their creations exert From the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford."
Looks like a sculpture i would expect from Sumer.
MacGregor is not making sense. Just because predynastic style statuary fetish did not survive all through the Dynastic period does not make it "curiously un-Egyptian". Even Dynastic era art conventions changed from era to era. They were not static. It rarely is anywhere else either.
As for the claim about "expecting the sculpture from Sumer", provide me with the parallels, not only chronologically but visually.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
MS 2787 PROTOHIEROGLYPHS OF SHIP AND OAR (TRANSPORTATION)
MS in archaic Egyptian on clay, Egypt, Nagada II period, 3500-3100 BC, 1 black top jar, diam. 13-6 cm, h. 28 cm, (7x18 cm), 1 line of 2 large protohieroglyphs incised in the clay.
Context: A related example incised with an ibis: Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, Predynastic Egyptian collection, fig. 25, no. 174.
Provenance: 1. Found at Kamoula, Egypt (1897); 2. Pitt-Rivers Museum, Farnham, Surrey; 3. Private collection, Switzerland; 4. Sotheby's New York 5.6.1999:337.
Commentary: The present jar and the Ashmolean jar have, so far, the earliest "script" known in the Western world, preceding the earliest examples from Egypt and Sumer. Whether it actually is script is under discussion. It certainly is not continuos writing.
A group of pottery and ivory tags was discovered in a predynastic Royal tomb in Abydos in 1998 with similar protohieroglyphs dated to 33rd - 32nd c. BC. A pottery shed was found in 1999 in Harappa in the Indus Valley with 6 signs, dated to ca 3500 BC, but without any connection to the later Indus Valley script, see MS 2645.
Exhibited: 1. Kon-Tiki Museet, Oslo, April 2002 - Jan. 2003; 2. Tigris 25th anniversary exhibition. The Kon-Tiki Museum, Oslo, 30.1. - 15.9.2003; 3. Kon-Tiki Museet, Oslo, September 2003 -.
MS 200
HOR AHA OF UPPER EGYPT, THE NAME OF ONE OF THE FIRST TWO PHARAOHS OF DYNASTY I
MS in archaic Egyptian on clay, possibly Abydos, Upper Egypt, 3007-2975 BC, 1 cylindrical jar, h. 24 cm, diam. 11 cm, 2 columns, (10x7 cm), 7 hieroglyphs, including the cartouche of Aha surmounted by a falcon denoting the royal title "Horus", and "Shema" for Upper Egypt, in a rapid flowing script in black ink.
Provenance: 1. Possibly excavated at the First Dynasty tombs in the Royal necropolis at Abydos; 2. Sotheby's New York 2.12.1988:126.
Commentary: Among the earliest examples of human script in ink extant. The oldest are probably similar cylindrical jars from Abydos, with the cartouche possibly of the predynastic King Ka, about 3100 BC. One of these is in British Museum (BM 35508). Further the recent discovery of a predynastic Royal tomb at Abydos containing inscribed pottery and ivory tags. The first 2 Pharaohs of the first dynasty, Narmer and Hor Aha, reigned both ca. 3000 BC. Beckerath, however, allocates Narmer as a pre-dynastic king, before 3000 BC.
Exhibited: 1. Conference of European National Librarians, Oslo. Sept. 1994. 2. "Preservation for access: Originals and copies". On the occasion of the 1st International Memory of the World Conference, organized by the Norwegian Commission for UNESCO and the National Library of Norway, at the Astrup Fearnley Museum of Modern Art, Oslo, 3 June - 14 July 1996. 3. The Norwegian Institute of Palaeography and Historical Philology (PHI), Oslo, 13.10.2003-
Source for the above notes on the exhibits: The Schoyen Collection.
From Dreyer's 1998 archeological work, as acknowledged above in the notes from the Schoyen Collection, we have...
"The earliest writing ever seen may have been discovered in southern Egypt. The hieroglyphics record linen and oil deliveries made over 5,000 years ago the new Egyptian discoveries have been confidently dated to between 3300 BC and 3200 BC using carbon isotopes.
The writings are line drawings of animals, plants and mountains and came mainly from the tomb of a king called Scorpion in a cemetery at Abydos, about 400 km (250 miles) south of Cairo
Since 1985, Mr Dreyer and his team have unearthed about 300 pieces of written material on clay tablets barely bigger than postage stamps
The newly discovered Egyptian writings also show that the society then was far more developed than previously thought, Dreyer said. He said man's first writings were not a creative outpouring but the result of economics: when chieftains expanded their areas of control they needed to keep a record of taxes. Although the Egyptian writings are made up of symbols, they can be called true writing because each symbol stands for a consonant and makes up syllables." - BBC News, Sci/Tech, 1998.
Photos: Courtesy Dreyer
Thus, these findings date the earliest scripts of the Nile Valley, which can confidently be considered writing or continuous writing , back to Nagada III phase. One thing is clear, as Dreyer put it,
The newly discovered Egyptian writings also show that the society then was far more developed than previously thought, Dreyer said.
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence. There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns. Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Posts: 175 | From: Who knows? | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^^^^keep in mind many in this forum believe the Sumerians were bearded black people from Kush
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence.
Spiralman, you are of course entitled to fantasizing, but if we are dealing with facts, you'll need a heck lot more than a few relics that could possibly have been used as trade-items to demonstrate how AE owes "Summerian and or Near Eastern influence" some of "its debt". Trade is a two-way street. You'll find items of Egyptian themes [I know they exist, because I've posted them here before] in the so-called "Near East". I don't hear you saying then that the "Near East" owes some debt to "Ancient Egyptian influence".
quote: There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years
There is no such thing as "Nubia". It is a 'western' construct, which in any case, will posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression. The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs.
Then there is the Kushitic complex, which is generally perceived to be an outgrowth of the Kerma complex, which owes nothing to Dynastic Egypt in its emergence. The Kushitic complex were considered major rivals to the Egyptians, and in fact, had at times actually almost controlled Egypt long before the eventual Kushitic takeover of Egypt in the 25th Dynasty. Your comment strikes me as being made, because you are ignorant of these basic facts of the Nile Valley?
quote: by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns.
The Kushitics incorporated both Egyptian and Roman elements that they liked into their own designs. Your claim is very simplistic. Likewise, the Greeks and Romans incorporated foreign architecture styles into their own. It happens all the time in complex societies; not a one way-street. For example, "Near Easterners" have adopted writing and languages from the Nile Valley, amongst other things.
quote: Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Unless you can elaborate on this, i.e. what you mean by "knowledge" [which is a very generalized term], and a detailed account on its specifics, this claim appears to something that is a personal opinion based on desired thinking rather than fact.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
"...posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression. The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs."
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Posts: 644 | Registered: May 2010
| IP: Logged |
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Where are your peer-reviewed sources for Dynastic AE, Horus falcon symbol, Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs claims originating in Nubia?
Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
the people of the Qustul region of Lower Nubia belonged to what historians call the A-Group culture. This Nubian cultural group was contemporaneous with the Egyptian prehistoric Naqada III period, and evidence suggests the A-Group had extensive trade and contact with the Egyptians of Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen), in particular. In fact, the A-Group was on par with certain Upper Egyptian regions on the path toward the development of a sophisticated state. That the A-Group failed to attain this level of socio-political development is probably the result of invasions by Upper Egyptians to wrest control of lucrative trade networks from the Lower Nubians. Wilkinson seems rather clear in stating the A-Group culture was all but wiped out soon afterward, but in reading I've done since then it seems probable that these Nubians of the A-Group persisted until the reign of Sneferu, in Dynasty 4 Egypt, when evidence for them ceases to exist. The incense burner was excavated from tomb L24 in Cemetery L at Qustul. a brief recipe clip I shot of it at the O.I., showing one portion of the burner. The burner was found in fragments and was reconstructed. All smooth, beige portions you see are part of the recreation, but all portions with reliefs and depictions are original. It's quite surprising how much of the burner has survived, given that it is over 5,000 years old. Not all of the burner is visible in the display case, of course. What's so important about the artifact is the icons it shows of distinctive Egyptian character. Scenes on the burner depict a seated figure wearing the White Crown, and bound prisoners--two motifs that would be part of Egyptian iconography for the entire dynastic period. Here's a photo of the museum's line-art illustration of all of the surviving scenes: Note also the palace facade and sacred boats, which are also very Egyptian in style. It's the White Crown in particular that fascinates me. ends at the portion of the burner in which the crown appears. It's hard to see unless you're looking at it yourself, so I'm including this photo: Still hard to see? LOL I know, it can be. In this image I've applied some red shading to the relevant portion: It's either a White Crown, or the people of Qustul were into decorating their material culture with images of bowling pins. I jest. All I'm doing is trying to get a chuckle out of you folks so you'll forget the fact that the actual Qustul Incense Burner has been at the O.I. all along, and I've missed it. My friend and fellow docent Dennis was there that day, too, and he assured me it's the real thing. He seemed rather amused that I didn't know it. All kidding aside, the images of Egyptian iconography are indisputable--but this artifact is from Lower Nubia, not Egypt. This was an entirely different culture. How to explain it? There remains the possibility, I suppose, that the A-Group people were the first to use the White Crown. That does not seem to be supported by evidence, though. It's obvious that the Qustul people and the people of Upper Egypt (certainly in the Hierakonpolis region) were in close contact, so perhaps they shared iconography in this very early period. As far as I'm aware, the Qustul Incense Burner contains the oldest definitive evidence for the White Crown. However, in that discussion at ED in 2007, posters posited other possible contenders. Anneke, for example, shared this image: Now on display in France, this statuette of schist dates to Naqada I, and was excavated at Gebelein, in Egypt. It's quite a bit older than the Qustul Incense Burner, and to me the figure definitely wears something very similar to the White Crown. Please feel delicious to provide comments or ask questions. But if nothing else, you can take two things from this post of mine: 1) When you're next at the O.I., check out the Qustul Incense Burner, a very significant artifact. 2) When you're next at any museum, learn from my example and actually open your eyes so you can see what's really there.
A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute white crown (?)
__________________________________ Narmer palette, white crown (approx 3150 BC)
One interpretation is that Nubian A-Group rulers and early Egyptian pharaohs used related royal symbols. Similarities in rock art of A-Group Nubia and Upper Egypt support this position.
Another view suggests that the decoration was carved by Nubians in imitation of Egyptian art and rituals. In this perspective, A-Group Nubian rulers would have emulated the symbols of Egyptian pharaohs, whose prestige and power were evident.
The best chances of resolving this question lie in further exploration of areas of Nubia that are still accessible, and in excavation in the centers of early Egypt, where further evidence of the development of pharaonic traditions may be found. "The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^BS. There is no evidence whatsoever, in predynastic Nagadan iconography, as I demonstrate in the link provided in my last post, of the "white crown" that is contemporaneous to the Qustul example. It's earliest appearance is in Qustul artifacts. All comtemporary Nagadan rulers wore the Red [Deshret] crown instead. I also note this in the link. The Red Crown actually appears to originally have been a Nagadan regalia rather than the Delta area.
Rock art is not a substitute for this evidence.
That last view is the most ridiculous of the views mentioned above. To make that view, you'd have to demonstrate Nagadan or Lower Egyptian precedences for the regalia in question. Reality though, is the opposite. Precedence is in Qustul artifacts.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: [Where are your peer-reviewed sources which demonstrate that such a thing as Nubia existed during pre-dynastic and dynastic periods?
As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea.
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
This incense burner is distinctively Nubian in form. Carved in the technique of Nubian rock art, it is decorated on the rim with typical Nubian designs.
That the A-Group failed to attain this level of socio-political development is probably the result of invasions by Upper Egyptians to wrest control of lucrative trade networks from the Lower Nubians.
According to what evidence?
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
/close
You are cherry picking and taking a single piece out of context of the broader narrative. Kendall acknowledges this:
Ironically, the earliest certain images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis. These images occur on two incense burners of uniquely Nubian type, which depict kings seated in archaic high-prowed boats wearing abnormally tall crowns with knobs, accompanied by bulls and Horus falcons(Williams 1980; 1986, pls. 33, 34). They date to about 3300 BC. The same crown then appears not long afterwards in Egypt: on an unprovenienced ivory knife handle in the Metropolitian Museum and, later still, on the Scorpion mace head and Narmer palette (Wilkinson 1999, 1945).
His broader narrative is that there are yet other signs, aside from the Qustul artifact, that points to a "Nubian" origin. This is why I referenced him. You might try to understand the broader narrative, instead of cherry picking and quoting out of context.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Qustul Incense Burner Limestone A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute
Narmer is thought to have reigned c. 3150 BCE
___________________________________________
as with the seal and palette, the dating is too imprecise to say one's first.
"The origin of the white crown is ambiguous."-Timothy Kendall
that's not some detail cherry picked, it's a summarizing statement and cannot be taken to mean definative
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Klutz, you are reading the statement by the man above in blocked letters, and yet you are lingering to some piece you wish to quote out of context.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
Show me one Nagadan ruler wearing a 'white crown' that is dated to the same time frame as the Qustul example. Let's test how ambiguous your findings will be.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
as soon as the insult appears you know you're winning what is the specific example, with photo source? Are we talking about the Incense burner, A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute?
The incense burner corresponds to early dynastic 32nd century BCE) and it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown. Predynastic Egyptians in the Naqada I period traded with Nubia to the south but the incense burner does not go back nearly that far. Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous
The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. p. 61
Blocked letters? what are you talking about? Kendall is quoted in blue type also
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, your sarcastic comment aside, I don't see your answer to the challenge above.
-------------------- The Complete Picture of the Past tells Us what Not to Repeat Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: as soon as the insult appears you know you're winning
I must be winning; you are unable to come up with even a *single* Nagadan ruler wearing a white crown that is contemporaneous to that of the Qustul ruler. If the situation was "ambiguous" as you say, this would have been an easy feat. Why hasn't it?
quote: what is the specific example, with photo source? Are we talking about the Incense burner, A-Group (3200-3000 BC)-Oriental Institute?
The king wearing the white crown, and the falcon dates to 3300 BC. If you are going to whine about how this might not be precise, then you are going to have to do the same to all similarly ancient complexes, including the likes of Uruk. You only have issues with this sort of thing, when it comes to African things.
quote: The incense burner corresponds to early dynastic 32nd century BCE) and it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown.
The Qustul incense is older than the first dynastic period. You have shown no evidence otherwise, other than manufacturing your own information. It features proto-hieroglyphs; that itself should be a sign that it has got to be older than the first Dynasty. Even the falcon on the imagery is cruder than that we see in the first dynastic period. Name a source that says it is dated to the first Dynasty, wherein hieroglyphs appear reasonably well developed.
quote: Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous
BS. Let's see what the source that you tried to quote out of context says about it:
Oddly, in the famous painted tomb of Hierakonpolis, also Naqada II, there is not one representation of a white crown among the numerous images of the ruler. And on the painted textile from Gebelein the ruler seated in the boat wears only a kind of bowler hat (Genesis, pl. 12). - T. Kendall
You hear that, not a single Nagadan ruler of the images sported the White Crown, not one, among those numerous depictions! This actually answers that challenge I put to you.
This is what the same source had to say about its date, as I cited above:
Ironically, the earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia, about 300 km up-river from Hierakonpolis. These images occur on two incense burners of uniquely Nubian type, which depict kings seated in archaic high-prowed boats wearing abnormally tall crowns with knobs, accompanied by bulls and Horus falcons(Williams 1980; 1986, pls. 33, 34). They date to about 3300 BC.
^This single piece obliterates your flimsy posts on several fronts; you wrote:
1) it is not even clear of it's definitely a white crown. - lioness
The Kendall post above says, on other hand:
earliest **certain** images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia - Kendall
2) You wrote:
Narmer on the palette with white crown, is contemporaneous - lioness
But the Kendall post says:
earliest certain images of the white crown come not from Egypt but from Qustul in Lower Nubia - Kendall
And that:
They date to about 3300 BC.
This is before the age estimated for the Narmer palette.
So much for that cherry-picked single piece you focused on.
quote:Blocked letters? what are you talking about? Kendall is quoted in blue type also
You see, when I called you a klutz, I wasn't insulting you as you figured. It is an observation. I was referring to my citation of Kendall, wherein I blocked some letters for emphasis, precisely so you would be able to see them. I see that I failed in even that feat. No amount of simplification can make you catch on.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
if you want to pretend that the dating that precise, it's not
I told you the incense burner is dated by the Oriental Institute (3200-3000) Not 3300
Also note within that the the 200 year variance 3200-3000 given by one the most credible Near East research organizations.
Then we have the Narmer palette dated to 3100-3200 BC
Obviously, the exact dating is unknown and the differences in this case are not far.
But you say a date you liked 3300. Stick to that if it makes you feel better.
that's what it's all about __________________________________
if you want to keep on we can get into radio-carbon data, etc. methodology or we can just accept whoever says the thing we want to hear and pretend it's exact
*also the typographic term is "bolded" letters not "blocked" (don't mean to be annoying*)
Posts: 42921 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you want to pretend that the 3300 BC date attributed to Qustul is not acceptable, then you ought to apply this same reason to just about any other ancient complex, from Nagada, Uruk, Meso-America, etc, not your double standards of accepting dates for one complex and questioning those of another. You also ought to stop being a hypocrite, because you should just as well question your so-called "contemporaneous" date of the Narmer Palette equally so.
If you want to pretend that the A-Group is contemporaneous to the Dynastic Egypt, then go ahead, but you won't find any reputable source on it.
If you want to pretend that imagery that is more basic and cruder on the Qustul incense is the same age as the more developed versions of the early Dynastic period, then knock yourself out.
If you want to pretend that there are Nagada figures wearing the White crown at a contemporaneous time as the figure on Qustul artifacts, then go ahead.
If you want to pretend that the Oriental Institute thinks the Qustul incense is contemporaneous with the first Dynasty, then go ahead and stick your head in the sand:
he decoration of the Qustul Incense Burner, as restored. A sacrificial procession contains the earliest **definite** image of a pharaoh with his crown and falcon-label. Oriental Institute Nubian Expedition. - Oriental Institute of Chicago. Source: Link
If you want to pretend that the incense is dated to 3200 BC, instead of the often generally cited 3300 BC, even according to your own earlier citation above, then hallucinate away.
If you feel good about manufacturing information, instead dealing with facts, then go crazy. That's what its all about.
There is no "if", re: methodology, dating, etc. You have evidence on something, then bring it on. And you are annoying, because you are a very dense individual [just an observation of fact; I don't mean to be insulting]
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
I think the artifacts presented reveal that Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian and or Near Eastern influence. There a many interesting links, Though its interesting to see that the only links Egypt has with Nubia is the fact that Nubia was a controlled and dominated region for thousands of years by the Egyptians which by default surfaces many things such as culture and architectural forts, temples and columns. Knowledge clearly started in the Middle East and dead ended at Nubia.
Egypt owes some of its debt to Sumerian influence? And then you cite the Gebel el Arak artifact showing what seems to be a Mesopotamian warrior on the back side? That has to be the weakest argument in the history of demonstrating cultural influence. According to that line of thinking, every time the Ancient Egyptians depicted a subject of a foreign nation, like say on the table of nations, the depicted nations have a share of the pie as well..?
This southern bowman went to Egypt to rub off his culture on the natives simply because he was depicted in Predynastic Egyptian art?? Although the latter is factual, ie, African influence on Egypt, no one in his right mind would depend on this image to make that claim. So why do you? Could it be because you're compensating for a lack of appropriate evidence to demonstrate the ''knowledge'' that Ancient Egypt supposedly owes the Near East?
It is funny to me that how often singleAfrican cultures get pitted against the rest of the entire world outside of Africa, as if the rest of the world is one thing. African cultural hallmarks in Egypt mean nothing to these folks, but every area outside of Africa that has some marginal association with some object inside Ancient Egyptian remains gets hollywood type of attention. Note his choice of words: ''the Near East''. How the hell do we go from Mesopotamian influence to ''the Near East''?
In what kind of position was comtemporary ''Near East'', to deposit anything substantial in Ancient Egypt?
What cultural Ancient Egyptian hallmarks can we identify and associate with those areas in the Middle East that were in shape to deposit something substantial?
Because I can identify numerous Ancient Egyptian cultural hallmarks that trace their origin back to the African continent.
Notice that I said hallmark, rather than some vague object that doesn't mean nothing in the grand scheme of Ancient Egyptian history.
The people on this thread who insist that Egypt owes something extraordinary to Mesopotamia but not the other way around suffer from some ole ''if we can't demonstrate physical affinity with Ancient Egypt, let's force out cultural diffusion towards Ancient Egypt''.
Of course, demonstratable, hard concrete influence of Eastern Africa on the Near East, eg, language, script and Mesolithic tool industries, fuels this compulsive need to get even, even more.
posted
Since Bruce Williams published his Qutsul and Hedjet idea, Abydos digs have revealed AE royal graves which predate Qustul burials. Nubian archeologist W.Y. Adams said, "The evidence for William's theory is not convincing. At the time his theory was published, Qustul tombs antedated the earliest royal tombs of Egypt, of Naqada phase IIIb. But recently an Abydos tomb of IIIa has been found(U-j) so Qustul loses chronological primacy. There are unusual objects in Egyptian style at Qustul, but they are all likely to have been imports from Egypt, not products of Nubia. Two vessels, for example, have painted designs, according to Williams, the conquest of southern Egypt(Ta shemau) and of Nekhen. But the worn signs may be misread, and in any case would refer to conquests by the Egyptians over other Egyptians, since the vases are of Egyptian origin. Early in the 1st Dynasty, the A-group culture including Qustul ended and they were driven away not to return for about 600yrs. This can only have been due to organized Egyptian aggression, intended to place the valuable trade of stones and gold under their control. The Egyptians not only prevented Lower Nubian resettlement; early in the 4th Dynasty they founded several strategically placed towns, such as Buhen. These improved Egypt's access to Lower Nubian minerals and perhaps reflect an increased trade with Upper Nubia. However, some 160 yrs later Egypt abandoned these towns and Nubians began to resettle Lower Nubia..."
"The evidence from Umm el Gabb(Abydos) demonstates that not only pharaonic kingship, but also the primary elements of a centralized statesystem, including writing and a complex administrative governmental apparatus, were evolving in Egypt for several centuries prior to the 1st Dynasty and there is no comparable evidence for the long-term development of such institutions in the A-Group."
Predynastic AE was trading partners with Lower Nubia so no surprise that the Nekhen AE style and made Qustul burner was discovered there along with other AE products.
Horus King symbols, Rosette, AE style ships, Lotus/Papyrus plants, Hedjet crown, Hieroglyphs and proto-glyphs all have origins in Naqada AE cultures north of the 1st cataract.
King Scorpion with Red and White(Hedjet)crowns c.3200BCE
In addition to maintaining trade contacts with Egypt, A-Group rulers employed symbols that were used by Egyptian pharaohs of that time. Some Nubian seal impressions depict a bow above a rectangle (right), probably the earliest writing of Ta-Seti, Land of the Bow, an ancient Egyptian name for Nubia.The A-Group flourished until it was destroyed by pharaohs of Egypts First Dynasty around 3100 BC. Much of northern Nubia was not inhabited for centuries afterwards, at least partly because of Egyptian military action. There is evidence of some occupation during this time, however; a settlement at Buhen near the 2nd cataract, with Egyptian and Nubian pottery, may have been a base for trade or copper working during the Egyptian Old Kingdom (26862125 BC).
"Ancient Nubia: Egypt's Rival in Africa" Philadelphia: University Museum / Univ. of Penn.
posted
Adam's claim really has no substantive value, when it comes to addressing Williams. Williams' case has been that the Falcon tradition of Kingship, along with the familiar Hedjet, that characterized Dynastic Egypt comes from the Ta-Seti A-Group. And he has tangible evidence to back him on that. He never implied that there were no Nagadan rulers running concurrently. It is understood that the A-Group rulers were a powerful bunch, since their cemetery was the richest in that region, until the 1998 Dreyer findings. It is still amongst the most furnished cemeteries of that sub-region and era, i.e. pre-dynastic Nagadan period. Of the numerous depictions available, not a single Nagadan ruler or figure have to date been seen with the Hedjet through much of the duration of that complex's existence; it only suddenly makes its appearance in the Nagadan territory at the turn of the Nagadan period, and hence, the emergence of the Dynastic era. The Qustul depictions of the Hedjet precede its Nagadan appearance. The sudden appearance therefore suggests that the Hedjet and the falcon concept came from somewhere else, and that somewhere else is certainly not the Delta region. The Qustul cemetary answers this question: the Hedjet tradition came from Ta-Seti, Qustul. This is the case Williams made.
Furthermore, there is no evidence of military conquest of the A-Group rulers. What simply happened is their sudden disappearance from their territory. But this sudden disappearance is compensated by the sudden appearance of the Hedjet and the falcon tradition in Nagada at the turn of the Nagadan period...which may very well hint on where the A-Group rulers actually ended up. And no, this situation cannot be compared with Upper Egyptian take over of the Delta, as there are no indications of such powerful element in the Delta region as that suggested at Qustul. Furthermore, none of the familiar Dynastic era regalia have their precedence in the Delta area. The Deshret crown has its precedence in the Nagadan region instead of the Delta. It is around this time that the Hedjet has its precedence at Qustul.
The Qustul incense burner and the other items sporting images of the ruler wearing Hedjet [and there is more than one occasion of such imagery] are not a Qustul import, as they were made of local material. So, Adam's claims in that regard, has no merit. It makes no sense for Qustul elite to furnish their burials with locally produced materials depicting foreign rulers, as opposed to Qustul rulers themselves.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: "There is no such thing as "Nubia". It is a 'western' construct, which in any case will posit the origin of Dynastic Egyptian culture in "Nubia", since that is where elements that have come to characterize Dynastic Egyptian find their earliest expression.
Nub means gold, a region dominated by Egyptians for acquiring Gold so its not much of a western construct.
quote:...The Falcon tradition, the Hedjet/White crown, and even proto-hieroglyphs.
Your sources?
quote:Then there is the Kushitic complex, which is generally perceived to be an outgrowth of the Kerma complex, which owes nothing to Dynastic Egypt in its emergence.
The Kerma complexes is clearly the result of trade and influence from Ancient Egypt.
Where is your evidence that Kush owes nothing to the Dynastic Egypt in its emergence? Dynastic Egypt predates Kush and was far more advanced than Kush including the fertile crescent. Egypt was, on the whole a technological, political and cultural etc influence on Nubia.
quote:The Kushitic complex were considered major rivals to the Egyptians, and in fact, had at times actually almost controlled Egypt long before the eventual Kushitic takeover of Egypt in the 25th Dynasty. Your comment strikes me as being made, because you are ignorant of these basic facts of the Nile Valley?
The south of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything remotely like the Dynastic Egyptian civilization. No knowledge comes from the south, if that was the case then there would be archeological, architectural, ethnographical and historical evidence for a southern knowledgeable drift into the North. The fertile crescent displays all sorts of archeological, architectural, ethnological and historical accounts on par with Dynastic Egypt proving that knowledge began in the Middle East region, spread to Egypt and dead ended in the South with Kush.
quote:Unless you can elaborate on this, i.e. what you mean by "knowledge" [which is a very generalized term], and a detailed account on its specifics, this claim appears to something that is a personal opinion based on desired thinking rather than fact.
For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
quote:The Kushitics incorporated both Egyptian and Roman elements that they liked into their own designs. Your claim is very simplistic. Likewise, the Greeks and Romans incorporated foreign architecture styles into their own. It happens all the time in complex societies; not a one way-street. For example, "Near Easterners" have adopted writing and languages from the Nile Valley, amongst other things.
Yes, even though Greece, Rome and the Near East incorporated some foreign elements, each of those civilizations are still unique and significant with respect to homegrown knowledge displaying a culture unlike those who influenced them. Kush or Nubia doesn't demonstrate anything remotely on par with the Ancient Egyptian and Near Eastern civilizations. To say Nubia or Northern Sudan laid the foundation for Ancient Egypt while not demonstrating the prefigures of Ancient Egypt is irrational and doesn't make any sense.
Posts: 175 | From: Who knows? | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged |
The square sailed boat on the Qustul burner is predynastic AE style in origin. PAE were major cedar importers from Lebanon for temples, homes, tools and ships. And with the sail up indicates sailing with prevailing winds from north to south but this could just as well be north-south between nomes in Upper Egypt. Sails down would indicate going from south to north with the Nile river current.
Your argumentation by improbability is not persuasive evidence to show A-group origins of predynastic Naqada I-III cultures. Where are the other artifacts that predate and influence Naqada cultures?
As for the wood long distance trade, we know that Aha's immediate predecessor Narmer had a great deal of relations with the Near East (Canaan) as attested in various sites expecially by Serekhs with his name onto wave handled jars (fragments). The hard cedar wood of Lebanon has been found in poles and beams of the Umm el Qaab tombs but it was already imported earlier as we can see from D.A.I.K. findings in Abydos cemetery B(Iry Hor, Ka, Narmer) and U (expec. Naqada IIIa2, c.3250).
posted
^You are not even coherent enough to understand what was said just moments ago. Nobody said anything about Nagadan culture being from the A-Group; that is a figment of your imagination. What was said, is that the Hedjet along with the falcon tradition came from A-Group, and there's tangible evidence to back it up. Short of spamming the thread, you have not produced anything the slightest that challenges this fact.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Proto-hieroglyhs about the size of postage stamps? Confidently dated between 3200-3300 B.C.? I don't know about you buddy, but that sounds pretty much like the Egyptians invented writing practically overnight. I mean think about it. They came up with a few symbols between 3300-3200 B.C. and then a few generations later they were all out into a complex writing system that lasted close to 3000 years. I think you're going to have to do better than that.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
If there is any characterization that is unique to the Egyptian form of expression in the form of lettering, it may be simply that the Egyptians desired their own writing style.
Posts: 676 | From: the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
Nub means gold, a region dominated by Egyptians for acquiring Gold so its not much of a western construct.
You obviously don't comprehend the question, let alone provide the requested answer. Again: produce your evidence that a centralized polity named "Nubia" existed during pre-Dynastic and Dynastic period.
quote: The Kerma complexes is clearly the result of trade and influence from Ancient Egypt.
Provide detailed account of how Kerma is the product of Ancient Egypt, with material corroboration.
quote: The south of Egypt doesn't demonstrate anything remotely like the Dynastic Egyptian civilization. No knowledge comes from the south, if that was the case then there would be archeological, architectural, ethnographical and historical evidence for a southern knowledgeable drift into the North. The fertile crescent displays all sorts of archeological, architectural, ethnological and historical accounts on par with Dynastic Egypt proving that knowledge began in the Middle East region, spread to Egypt and dead ended in the South with Kush.
This is emotional gibberish. Lacks any material backbone.
quote:For example, Jericho, Göbekli Tepe, Çayönü, Abu Hureyra, Çatalhöyük, City states in the Mesopotamian region etc were in fact advanced and older than Dynastic Egypt. Human burial, religion, stone foundations, first murals, sculptures, plaster walls, etc originatead with these people thus the prototype laying the foundations for Egyptian civilization. Nothing like this lays to the South evidencing the fact that Knowledge began from the Levant and ended at Nubia.
More emotional bs. For starters, where can we find Nagadan [Deshret crown] and A-Group [Hedjet crown] political structures, i.e. the components of the entire network, or the Pharaonic structure in the "Near East"? Tell us why dynastic-style centralized polity starts first in the Nile Valley before it happens in the so-called "Near East". Point out where can we find Egyptian proto-hieroglyphs of the Nile in the "Near East" that predate the Nile Valley examples, and cannot be demonstrated as an import? How did these social organizations just skip the Delta region, which is even closer to the "Near East" by way of a land bridge [Sinai], and concentrate in the southern parts of the Nile? What Mastaba tradition can you point out about the "Near East" that paves way for the pyramid structures in the Nile Valley? Point out how upper Nile Valley burial customs, like say how the deceased is positioned et al., have parallels in the so-called "Near East", and occur there first. Let's deal with these first, and then dig deeper, as you come up with answers.
The rest of your material-free emotional drivel is not worth a second look.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Original Quote by The Explorer: "As for the falcon tradition, the Hedjet and proto-hieroglyphs, ever heard of Qustul, ever read archeologist Bruce Williams' reports, or Timothy Kendall? Try searching for these items, and you'll get the idea."
LOL, notice how angry T.E. is when pressed to show actual evidence. Qustul burner has proto-glyphs. Argument by authority, improbability and ad nauseum is his style. Why is it hard for you to accept PAE origins for the above items if you think they are very similar in phenotype to A-Group culture? Or maybe you don't? The all-knowing Explorer blog overrules ALL peer-reviewed scholarship. LOL Posts: 644 | Registered: May 2010
| IP: Logged |
Proto-hieroglyhs about the size of postage stamps? Confidently dated between 3200-3300 B.C.? I don't know about you buddy, but that sounds pretty much like the Egyptians invented writing practically overnight. I mean think about it. They came up with a few symbols between 3300-3200 B.C. and then a few generations later they were all out into a complex writing system that lasted close to 3000 years. I think you're going to have to do better than that.
I don't know about you buddy, but your post sounds like something that comes out someone who cannot think. The writing starts out as simpler pictographs, which then give way to more elaborate pictographs, this in turn gives way to simplified letters developed out of glyphs, and then eventually cursive scripts. Furthermore, the Nile Valley examples predate the earliest examples in the so-called "Near East". You are going to have to do better than provide emotional denials. You have got to demonstrate from where these supposedly came from, if not the Nile Valley. The Nile Valley folks never adopted the tablet; instead they used the world's first paper [papyrus]. I suppose you think that too must have been too "sudden" for it to be a local development.
Posts: 7516 | From: Somewhere on Earth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic